with the court's indulgence i would like to st start with mr jones pretrial forever and ever tempted fred invocation and then transition to his irreconcilable conflict issue regarding his  currently before mr jones his benefit there aren't any brady claims raised below or on appeal right that's correct your honor they could be raised in an appropriate vehicle later on in the in some post conviction motion or regarding what i would consider to be mr jones's overriding issue and that is that mr jones and there it's clear that there is a discrepancy between the testimony that the border patrol agent never mr jones evidence or hearing and the deposition testimony of the material witnesses regarding whether special agent with the border patrol agent crap had actually questioned the material witnesses regarding the circumstances of their being transported close to the the border checkpoint solely on a tip so what does that make a difference in this case let me let's just assume for purposes of our discussion that the detention was illegal how would how would that affect his conviction you're not making the  any argument that anything introduced a trial where he didn't get a confession during got detention there was no seizure of evidence during that confession they're very good at detention so you may have a nine hundred and eighty three  detention but why would it affect the conviction well everything that followed in this case stemmed from the detention no no we didn't they went out and they found the three guys but they did find them your honor but they otherwise would not have had any reason absent that yes i think that it is that's just that it doesn't respond to my question let's assume the police arrest me illegally don't have any reason to and then later on get a videotape of me committing a crime are you saying they can't prosecute me for the crime because they arrested me illegally it depends on no no no for the poisonous tree argument they didn't in your case they didn't their ability to detain or find these three guys was not dependent on whether or not mr jones was detained and in my case they found the videotape because it somebody else mailed it in you have a great  inside the car that's correct your honor they were found during secondary they they were found most completely following mr jones's detention which happen very soon and he wasn't so maybe they found stuff that was irrelevant when they kept him and maybe he's got a claim against the government for that but how did that affect the fairness of his trial didn't specifically affect the fairness of the trial for say  was the evidence from the cell phones and weeds introduced as evidence at trial of his guilt it was your honor you know and certainly that the cell phone evidence was introduced at great length including cell phone location data obtained from his samsung there's there were there were five others and four times they were replaced there were these repeated efforts to replace counsel for what would appear to be or quote conflicts across quote the century were created by your client and he's asked me to time whether he wants to represent himself he says now and then finally that this this was all being done for the purpose of this was the final request that you're talking about was or for that the way i think you'd have to understand your honor is concerned i think you have to look at all th  remove counsel whether he'd like to represent himself and he said no there were two occasions when that did happen so that so that if he put it in and when you combine that with waiting until the day of trial to say no i've changed my mind now i do want to represent myself he well before trial that he was going to be stuck with his counsel that he wanted removed right he certainly should have had a suspicion that he might have been stubborn mr slack judge judge said i'm not going to grant your motion would you like to represent yourself and he said no not just a suspicion he had knowledge at that point i'll refer the court to and i would like to reserve some time for a photo but if i could  that so we would view this is simply mr jones is faced with the reality of trial being imminent you know the jury was about to be impaneled on november th two thousand and seventeen and faced with that imminence he finally decided that he wanted to quick certainly awkward question since he served he served the sentence he has you have so that takes care of two issues that you raise one regarding how the sentence was calculated by the district judge and also your clear that where the district court makes a finding that the defendants motions for purposes of delay and that is a factual finding the tribute for clear air we argue that in our brief and on the day the trial was about to begin iraqi did not make in september he makes it for the st time in november and the court says you know this is the rd time you've had a trial date this is the nd time the jury pool is waiting to be brought into the courtroom the district court walks through the history with the prior council i think it's significant that on we see three prior instances in this case the court made a finding the defendant was his actions were for purposes of delay two of those had to do with substitution motions and one of those has to do with his refusal to leave the holding cell on the morning of the september inquire as to what is the cause of the breakdown in communication the government asserts that the breakdown in communication is is not enough he has to point to legitimate grievances as in all relationships communication breakdowns between attorneys and clients don't happen spontaneously they're caused by some other conflict and here within the district court was correct to focus on the basis for that conflict and we think the record is very clear about why there is a conflict between disagreement whether the defendant is dissatisfied and i think it's it's most clear if the court look disagreement one has to do with the defendant's bond revocation and the defendant came to view that he'd received advice from counsel about how to handle that matter and the nd has to do with the allegedly false statements and the governor would be happy to address both of those in detail but we think it's clear that the district court correctly concluded those are baseless grievances and we also think it significant that the october hearing where the defendant is present his oral representation to the court confirmed the two bases in the motion so at page seventeen of the transcript the court as defendant why he's making the motion and he starts by pointing to dissatisfaction about the handling of the allegedly false statement and then the final page of this transcript which is that you are twenty two he says what about my bond that is the issue about the reason why i wanted to have a different attorney violated on that part so he's again clear that the reason he's decided side is because of the bond revocation that wasn't discussed at great length of the government's brief but just to provide a little bit more contacts the defendant was arrested in june of two thousand and seventeen he  people often get confused about federal or state law requirements you can't have marijuana he then feels for more drug tests in the span of five weeks and adopt at the bond revocation hearing counsel does advise his client that you know it would be fruitless to try to contest the subsequent failed drug tests were because of drug residue from the marijuana brownie he consume the st time but the record if the court were to look at that makes clear that the toxicologist who screens these report is screening for new versus residual using the toxicolog found that the subsequent violations indicated new use i'd also like to touch on the false statement the allegedly false statement by the border patrol agent and here's the problem i guess if there's no franks issue raised  so at the time that the motorcyclist makes the tip he doesn't say that these are aliens he doesn't even speak to their ethnicity and so there's no facts that indicate the border patrol agent that they are aliens however draws on his experience border border patrol agents at this time where there's a trend in this area of smuggling cartels trying to circumvent the checkpoint by dropping people off in advance of the checkpoint having them hike around it and then picking up where is the turning point i think where is the yes so this is far far south of that so this is and this is south of the city of san diego in that kind of expanse between the city of san diego and the united states mexico border to qadi is probably ten or fifteen highway ninety four where there are picked up by the defendant and then they drive in the car and they're stopped at the checkpoint which is about twenty miles north of the border itself but the actual getting out of the corps was in athens close proximity to the track very close proximity and a the aliens observe a sign indicating that there is a border patrol checkpoint that is open in front of them so we think this was this was more than enough for reasonable suspicion and can you speak to the length of the tension the length of the tension was not challenge below  and therefore you know it's not discussed a great length of suppression hearing and it hasn't been challenged before this court but the record indicates that the defendant was held for approximately one hour he's stops at the checkpoint at one hundred and forty five and he's officially arrested at two forty five pm this court does not have a temporal litmus test for why but obviously you couldn't keep somebody for a week of course yes here it's an hour and we think that the evidence indicates that's a reasonable amount of time given that the canine officer needs to get in his truck and head down the road he proceeds past the spot where they are allegedly dropped off so his dog can get downwind of where the persons are suspected to be and then be using standard border patrol techniques they exact through the very dense brush along the road so it takes him about a half an hour from when he gets out of his car to find the aliens and then they need to have someone come pick up the aliens put them in a squad car where they can be safely transported so it's another fifteen minutes from when he finds them till he gets back and is able to arrest formally arrested defendant can you can you speak to the post that is correct so here he has i think it's a category d felony where the guidelines recommends one to three years as well as released in the district court chose to give him a three year term of supervised release so we don't think that the you know if he gets a two point reduction from minor role reduction that would affect affect the calculation as to the post demotion you think it was correctly you know when it was actually denied and we think even if it wasn't the defendant hasn't shown that he was prejudiced by the nile that motion because he hasn't shown that he would have received a more favorable sentence if he had represented himself ordinarily your honor the sometimes defendants will insist that they can go to trial immediately or substitute in very smoothly oh i see so you're saying you just record should have said even if you're making this for purposes of delay i'll grant your motion that i'll