we'll hear the next case kline versus united states your honors i am my name is howard simmons i represent eric cline in this matter i am before you today your honour's for your consideration of some very fundamental constitutional issues which were not addressed or were addressed in an extremely cursory way in the district court first of all we are seeking the court's intervention on the claim that the gathering of testimonial evidence from an s e c proceeding was introduced by the prosecution on its direct case at the trial and that this presentation of this s e c proceeding was a direct violation of mr klein's due process rights this was never addressed by judge jones and her a didn't in the whole case was settled so how do you combat that now and say no i don't think that she paid enough attention when vet was all part of that case in beer for part of any into consideration in the twenty two fifty five whether she took it into consideration or not or whether she urged at the time or not that is all a matter for an appeal from her decision at that if she made a mistake the time to raise that mistake was with respect to that i believe that was raised and what happened when it was  appealed and that was upheld that was yet of the case if it wasn't appealed then that was we end of the case but you can't go back now and say oh well we wanted to see it come out differently and so we seek cert but you can't because you don't like what a court or a court an appeal discussed in a previous case come back  it just isn't you know what goren no because well your honor if you like i will proceed to further issues in this case which aren't my thing were not the subject of joint it says whether judge jones right consider the issues or not they could have been raised by your client right i understand that you mean he brought twenty five motions or applications relating to his two thousand and five conviction yes yes judge approximate least appealed seven times all right yes you know this is the eighth appeal through how much longer is this going to go on this is this is the last the last effort here your honor i submit that in the issues he's raising now could they not have been raised in one of the earlier seven appeals many were many were and were let the were submitting that they were not given any consideration or short shrift consideration in the court below certain issues we're raising here for the first time the coroner's office application your honor i understand your concern that some of these issues are or were not raised on the record people in the court below but a lot of these issues came to light through investigations and discovery pursuing this of course your honor i do i have many constitutional claims here that i would like to address to the court and i believe should be heard by this court and there is a good faith basis for presenting those constitutional claims to the court and that's the reason the purpose for being here today if you'd like me to proceed with argument on several of those constitutional claims i will live minutes you can use on what you want to judge secondly i'd like to address the waiver of counsel issue as you see in the briefs mr klein up away from his right to counsel the wreck appeal addressed whether the district judge and allow erred in allowing mr klein to proceed pro se but there have still however is an issue that remains honor whether your honor is whether he waived his right to counsel and was therefore the private of the sixth amendment right during a critical stage of the proceedings so again the issue is whether he waived his right to counsel which we submit he did not he was there for the private of a sixth amendment right to be presented by a lawyer during critical stages of the proceeding these critical stages including the plea negotiations when he didn't have a lawyer discussions of discovery wouldn't have a lawyer and as your honour's know the right to counsel is a continuous continuous in federal courts to expressed in many many court decisions including johnson these are just so again your honour's i submit that constitutional right of mr kline was abrogated by him being forced by the district court to be pro se counsel and to act as his own attorney take it you're saying that since he was counsel your question is why wasn't it presented in that it was presented on their wrecked appeal however judge and it remains in the court record yes rejected that's correct or on the third issue i'd i'd like to focus on your honor the speech your honors a speedy trial issue mr klein's attorney during his representation of mr kline during the course of the trial proceedings never addressed the fact that the prosecution had exceeded the seventy day speedy trial statute by eighty two days which in fact is conceded by the government and i'd like to draw your attention to a case that i cited in my brief united states or says marshall where the d c circuit therefore clear violation of his due process rights petition and in fact were never going to addressed by judge jones and her decision nor commented on it all by the prosecution and i charted all of that out in my in my brief before the court lastly honors is the ineffective assistance of counsel issue and this is an important believe an important issue and that united states attorney during the course of the trial has direct case had a government exhibit which was one hundred a introduced into the trial which was a letter composed by the prosecutor in fact a view of the record is that he even consented to the introduction of this very prejudicial letter which was getting composed by the prosecutor himself which made the prosecutor a witness like a broken record but was this dealt with again and again judge these are issues that came to four upon further review of the case and upon further investigation of the case many of these  many of these issues about the constitutionality of the of the conducting of the trial were presented in the in the twenty to fifty five are simply were given short shrift by judge jones some of them were not even responded to by the prosecutor in the case and all  leslie's the restitution of the restitution issue and i believe that i submitted a letter to the court regarding that in a very also included in the in the brief and that was presented to the court and the issue of the restitution is stands out here as another example of the ineffective assistance of counsel that was presented to my client during the course of the trial and following the trial when restitution was ordered to a four a four b witness an excess of forty two thousand dollars and he was my client was ordered to pay another seventy seven thousand dollars in restitution and none of this was ever even discussed with his attorney or even  calculated in court or on the record or even presented at the trial and again this is a clear violation of my client's due process rights and closing i restrict spectrally requests that the court based upon these constitutional good morning may please the court my name is christopher clore i'm going to sustain the united states attorney here in the southern district of new york i represent the united states of people eric cline is a vexatious litigant who since his conviction has filed dozens of frivolous motions both with the district court as well as with this record and that is despite an order from the district court ordering kline to seek permission before filing additional post trial motions and despite two warnings from this court that additional frivolous motions would result in the imposition of sanctions moreover each of klein's claims are procedurally barred because they are on timely and more advanced  direct appeal and subsequent habeas petitions and are meritless because klein has failed to demonstrate that he suffered any prejudice as a result of the alleged errors the instant petitions therefore are nothing more than further evidence disregard for the district court's order as well as this court's warnings accordingly we would respectfully ask that this court uphold judge codes denial of client's core nobody's petitions with that unless the panel has any