given to the client in making the plea choice you seem to be focused on the reason that issue to the court that's correct are ok so that's the only argument you're making to us it isn't really because pursue it with us well i'm puzzled by the way you frame the claim because if we don't have anything the record does suggest whether or not that advice was or was not given do we we don't trust her but if the evidence was that no such advice was given that we came to me there might be a stronger in fact of assistance counsel claim because it was inadequate advice with respect to the plea but the only way you frame the case to os is that the problem was that we didn't raise the states defending here has not said a single case holding that an indictment such as the one in this case this time are and those circumstances he cannot show that trial council's decision not to challenge the time applying cases such as this one and if we widen the lens even a little bit beyond this particular statute of limitations just the criminal statutes of limitation generally there are numerous circuits holding that congress could presumably extend the statute of limitations w knowing that when there is just that point would be sensible about the war or not file thing this challenge what would be the downside of a lawyer challenging government's evidence or a motion in limine and that happened before the decision was made to proceed by plea the only thing i would say your honor is i think there's a difference between what might be the best thing for a defense lawyer to deal and what is constitutionally a factor there in a fact that the standard of review and in fact of assistance of counsel claim is highly deferential the courts have said that there is a wide range of competent assistance and here there is simply not a single generally at just the principle of whether congress can commit the big stand a criminal statute of limitations when a claim has not yet expired i believe there are eight circuits that at that time had held that congress could permissible into that and of course you also have the supreme court's decision and starving or which draws a clear distinction between a law that extends an expired statute of limitations and one that is unexpired that the court looks at the start in a decision the supreme court talks about it the historical decide whether sufficient performance well the court has said that a defense counsel is not obligated to raise every colorable claim right and that there is a wide range of competent performance so what about from this circuit and this circuit there are in other words a situation where there is a call or will claim it wouldn't take much effort to file a motion  don't actually know what defense council was thinking because this has been raised on direct appeal there may have been best way for us to decide them is just our normal course run in trying to make a law here about what in the practice of the council standards are or what the statute means for a whole range of cases just as they take it up on twenty two fifty five if you can find a way t no statute of limitations that would otherwise apply sal client as cases as weingarten pointed out that language could be understood as simply displacing the preexisting five year default rule and so it doesn't tell us when it starting and talking about the difference between a live person expired claim there was no vested interest in not being prosecuted because the claim was still wide and i well know that even weingarten had said that not a single court has held that extending unexpired statute of limitations is impermissible retroactive in fact under land graph the weingarten court said that that would be a quote unquote novel holding we would urge the court not to be the first do that but to go with all the other weight of president and conclude that what