in this appeal is whether under the guidelines mr sloan sass the firearm in connection with another felony offense and it's our position that there is insufficient evidence to establish that connection so that the guideline calculation was wrong the the i mean the st thing is that mr sloan had moved out of the johnson house and wasn't living there staying there or actively and actively and directly possessing the items been left behind in the basement of the house of mr stevens i understand that the record included evidence that mr sloan still had a key to the basement area and had owner to come and open the door but i mean what's good whether he had it access or not i think it is very improbable that it that he recorded call from the channel where he told the person he was talking to that the guns were found in his stuff well he did have belongings that were there and and during that same statement i think all you're arguing at belongings that were his but that's the message somebody else's you know i think that's very probable so the standard of review the standard for the district court was was their problem has the government established by preponderance of the evidence why wouldn't the fact that his other stuff was down there there's no evidence that anybody else's stuff was down there that the logical conclusion by founders of the evidence would be that the best was this is well and get the association between that and the well i think that the the the guns and drugs were found by separate agents in separate places and that the areas that  these were found in was an area that was used by all the occupants of the house although there was a bad there where mistress long used to slay and he indeed did have a good set had been left behind there but it was an area where they came in to watch television together and it was shared by many people in the house so i think that work is rather than they are that the owner of the house just even how do you get around the district court statement that it would have  looking into that as as i understand started his his conclusion that he would override get the same at the same sentence was based on a statement that he determine the criminal history differently if you take out the drugs it shows that the the sentence the sentence really based on a suspicion that sloan is a drug dealer not phased in the unreliable evidence and the thirty five if you say look i don't read his statement quite the way you do mr stevens i'm looking at it and he's he's saying you know even if i calculated the guideline range differently in the st instance i would very to this same range and impose the same sentence of which he admitted were kids so i think i have trouble reading that it's anything but the judge signaling that this is the sentence this is my sentence and so whatever guideline adjustments might or might not be made wouldn't matter the four level enhancement for three reasons the st is the burden of proof which was by a preponderance of the evidence the nd reason is that the evidence was not just about the eighty grams of found on a certain day but rather made that specific finding that the judge would have imposed the same forty one month sentence even if the four level enhancement did not apply so going to the st point just because mr sloan was acquitted of the  forty one charge doesn't mean that the district court could not consider that he could consider the evidence of the acquitted conduct and he only had to find that it was more likely than not that mr sloan was in bold and  his possession of firearms and that it was in connection to his drug trafficking activity to the nd point the judge heard evidence that mr sloan told the a t f agent that he bought two of the guns in the summer of two thousand nineteen the judge heard from cassandra gangster who is a woman who bought about a pound of meth on two separate occasions from mr sloan in the fall of two thousand and nineteen and the judge also heard admit in his interview with the a t f that he had been middleman and drugs but he had been downsizing and that he had been staying off the books meaning that he hadn't been caught brings us t enhancement because that drug trafficking activity was not accounted for by the criminal history score so unless or any questions for me from the court i ask that the court affirmed the district court  i see no questions thank you very much and we'll go back to mr stevens anything further was no evidence that any firearm was in any way involved with any of those those items so i think that relying on that for the connection between the fire was there by a preponderance of the evidence evidence that sloan was asked the eighty grams of methamphetamine that he mean that's that's the part that that the drugs might play a role in i mean that guns might play a role in there so that the court has any further questions i'll