the supreme court specifically rules for one and six o five which were developed precisely to prevent the problems that occurred and the end result of those problems is that  reduce the number of appeals reduced the kind of feel that we're here for today the idea was twofold first of all to allow the circuit court the opportunity to address issues in the first instance while memories are fresh and the parties are still first comply with rule six fourteen then because the consequences of not complying to six of forty are so severe the court then implemented rule six o five rule six o five requires  rules will not work as they are intended to work then in order to address that problem the supreme court bank created the admonition exception so that defendants could have the opportunity to comply with rule six zero five instruction because that's what she did within thirty days she did file a notice of what the trial court said was that he is also in the habit of telling defendants that before they can appeal they must file a motion to withdraw the plea however the what the judge has done but it cannot substitute for and even that written admonition is phrased in terms of the defendant has been told it stands and here what we know from the record of the defendant was never then the the things that the judge also did in that case was he drew the defendant's attention to those written admissions verified his signature verified standing a good analogy to that is the written jury w i don't know that it does perhaps memories what have been better but i'm not sure that's necessarily true you know it would require speculation to guess as to what a vice if the bystander report would have been of enhanced term that is not contained in the docket entries but i think that's a minor point and but the major point is that room for one b requires a from beta recording and the cases have been very clear that that's what you've got to do to i would point out that one of the cases cited in my proof people be hearing is also the case from logan county and also with precisely the same problem but the rules require is not particularly onerous for looking county two or any other court to comply with and the consequences of not complying with it are serious enough that this court should enforce the pla purpose of the painter report we have to make sure and this court has to make sure that that counsel waiver is good so that we can prevent the these kinds of appeals from occurring in the first place that's what the rule is designed to do so that we don't have to have these debates we don't have to have we can if we have a question we could have just look through the the record if it existed and if the court had complied with the rule  some of the cases that were cited in the briefs talk about that and yet the fact that reversal isn't necessarily required if the defendant doesn't alleged for purposes of in defendant doesn't alleges specific error or a prejudice and hear this phrase you're full circle back to the six of five problem ms jones wasn't couldn't do that because she was unable to file a real compliant motion because she was not given the right admonitions under this is what the defendant recalls this is what the state's train calls but it happens to be contrary to what the documentary indicates and i didn't find the bystanders report to be helpful whatsoever because he was all across the board is to what actually happened he simply recalls are our states what everybody's recollection was and the problem is that machine just record stuff sure came up was that not happening in two thousand and twelve i recall which case it was i think it's twenty three but it's it's disturbing that we have to have an appeal like this and i know how difficult it is to try and can't remember what i've said an hour ago let alone what has occurred eight months ago  probably the defendant has the best memory because she's the person who's really affected it's kind of a routine matter for the state's attorney and for the trial sure as she specifically recalled not being here she also s where exactly right the back stairs report isn't terribly specific and the reason for that is it's a high volume court room and the judge really couldn't remember everything that occurred but that's kind of the point isn't it if we had a verbatim recording we would have to doesn't necessarily conflict with the documentary say all the documentary says is appeal rights given that could mean to the judge simply i told her she needed to file a notice of appeal and thirty days so if the docket entries were specific as to the rule  issue or part the substance of the rule you can use that that document but even if she had read it the judge did not draw her attention to it or verified that she signed it or more importantly that she understood it so from that