is the court counsel my name is emily rose and i'm with the office of the state of hope and are representing robert jackson in this case mr jackson's been fighting for his right eyelid direct appeal for nearly a decade and that's why we're asking that your honour's remand this case to the trial or for a ruling on the motion which would give mr jackson the opportunity to file a direct appeal however if you're honest and that such a relief is not appropriate we ask that you reman he had told him that the only evidence that she presented at the hearing was jackson's testimony and the only argument that she made a theory was that filing a motion to reconsider satins was consistent with the client wanting to appeal consistent in general not consistent in this case just consistent in general this was not even the barest attempts to meet the burden of proof at the hearing which jet which they were required to do the motion and the motion wasn't timely and thus wouldn't have had the effect that rose intended it to keep the file open for jackson to change his mind about filing an appeal and she also didn't present any available at any of the seeing and didn't question rose about his by staff and the possible after that tragedy and his performance in this case this information is critically important to establishing jackson's claims it offered a reasonable are alternative explanation i understand why he didn't want to make a disparaging remark about the attorney but i don't want that's the type of thing that's that is consider trial strategy to benefit  included in the petition well it's because it there's no possible way it could have been included in the petition the failure happened after the petition was are filed there's no way that it could have been mooted in th sheets provided an on reasonable assistance he didn't demand petition in any way in fact he stood on a petition that was legally and actually deficient the only reason that this position got to the third stage is because and mr sheets said no i'm going to stand on the petition everything mr jackson wants you to know is in that position and that said mr dixon stood up and said i asked him after my trial i asked him for a direct appeal i asked him if he was going to put in for it and he said he would my sister kept calling him he kept telling her he had to go back before the judge and eventually he told her you forgot he forgot because his wife died so the only reason that this tax you the second stage is because of mr jackson advocating for himself but again the reason this wasn't included in the first petition was that it couldn't have been because the failure didn't happen until after the the third seed she does it actually even mention jackson says he says mr rose's explanation was more likely true so i find that mr jackson asked him and that's exactly why she should have this or she should percent mr jackson and his family didn't contact him he said he couldn't recall but the fact that he didn't do anything that he in fact didn't file an appeal that's how he concluded that they never contacted him because he believes he would have done something if they had the timing of the of the of his waist in conjunction with jackson sister's testimony that she did contact him all of this his an alternate explanation as to why  explanation and that's exactly what happened at the hearing here and the fact that mr sheet didn't offer any other evidence other than a competing story jackson story to support jackson's version of events just goes to show that he didn't he didn't provide reasonable assistance thank you and one final point in regards to throw sixty one c again there are two