consideration mr cruz's limited role in this it's a stand simply and now i'm by the way into france and mr cruz had a small part of all the people in this case i'm also with the case your honour's also mr cruz the roman conduct was provided as a result of his cooperation where he admitted as to what he did and this isn't something where he just admit it when they caused him to have some type of advantage he did this right from the time in which he was arrested immediately after his arrest provided them with the consent to search of his home his car which i think it's important to note that there were no other illegal substances or weapons or anything of that sort that were contained within it mr cruz was labeled as a career offender which put him in that situation and i think runners this is a situation that it's kind of be pinned to what's going on in this country with some of these drug cases and the reevaluation of these drug cases to determine whether or not the sentences that are being handed down are fair with what  there is other factors that take into consideration and obviously i'm going for the nature of the circumstances of the offense and his role in that offense which i would argue respectfully was a very small role and  one could argue as i am that basically you had your family which you hope was the guiding words in your life to stay out of trouble but it seems that his family's more of the guiding force to be in trouble and a lot of this history you've seen from that family source and for him to stay away from gangs that he did and to at least take out these the contacts that he had it's somewhat troublesome however it's also somewhat amazing that he's been able to to do that and one of the other fall problems that i've had to see case well here let me just stop you from your thing is when you look at the sentencing and the statements made by the judge the judge was very sensitive to how he grew up some of the problems he is faced and knowledge the fact the various good things about the defendant and how he stayed in contact with his children quickly after the last incident and i understand a leg knowledge and i just believe that for this type of plants with what we're talking about here without the use of weapons with the small amount of the actual sale with the cooperation tha cruz hurting at least physically people but in the other retrospect is that he did attempt to atone and acknowledge his criminal conduct right after there and try to distance himself from that criminal conduct with this cooperation even though he did not now don't simply fill that he fulfilled that to his own detriment due to the fact that he believed with the family and what he was asked to do that was causing him some threats as to his physical safety so it's a sad situation because of what he tried to do and i think when you take everything into consideration the totality of the circumstances when looking at it i'm asking the court to balan's the nature and circumstances of the fa mr court the district court in this case imposed a reasonable sentence after considering all the relevant sentencing factors including the fact that the defendant was a career offender that he had recently been released from prison within six months prior to beginning t conduct in this case and that prior sentence was for a drug trafficking conviction the fact that he had a history of failing to comply with a court ordered supervision and the fact that the offense involved almost one kil heroin over a two and a half the defendant distributing almost one kilogram of heroin over a two and a half month period until he was arrested when he distributed one point two grams of heroin to an undercover police officer it's our position that the district courts officially only involved the sale of one point two grams of heroin that's what that's the count that the defendant pled guilty to through negotiations with the government the government was mindful of the fact that the defendant had been charged with a offense in federal guidelines he would be facing even a higher guideline range and so to say that the offense only involved the sale of one point two grams of heroin technically that's what he pled guilty to but when you consider the relevant conduct which the judge rightfully did it did not simply involve one sale of one point two grams of heroin had the defendant been convicted of the of the higher amount of heroin the guideline range would have been much higher his offense level would have been at level thirty four the government also agreed to dismiss that section except the one in from nation which also would have increased the guideline range for their career offender guidelines because it would have increased statutory maximum  it would have the fence level would have been level thirty and the defendant even without the application of a criminal career offender guideline increasing his offense or as criminal history category to six he still had a criminal history category five and that's something else  i would just point out that even though he was arrested for this offense he did attempt to acknowledge and to take accountability for his actions and and respectfully we would just ask the court to consider a downward departure or at least to