knew that brown committed the murder looking at it that way and started were focusing on whether they're really going to have a child was an indian's ten year old shoot em up kind of thing that you would pick somebody who wasn't an active member of a rival gang that unfortunately both because the real guns and findings to decide guidelines range would have been the same why would it be harmless you're honest because the district court and sentenced mr martin below the guidelines range which shows that the court was leaning toward conspiracy and the district court's explanation for making a complete one eighty on this issue is wholly unjustified supported our plants we didn't handle those documents we couldn't go down that road and when i say five hundred pages from interviews that occur over that period of time in those six years it wasn't just disorganization bucket scratching their way liberate killing each other over taking slaves we'd had all that information we certainly could have convinced the district court that there was no enterprise here court and for whatever relief you deem is appropriate thank you like  result proceeding would have been different and this judge aptly put it whether evidence is favorable and material is quote legally simple but factually complex in order to have a reasonable probability of a different result again this is ballard rampage five o five the suppressed evidence must undermined confidence in the outcome of the trial judgments as to whether there was material immaterial whether it was favorable or unfavorable turned over at the time it should have been and thank you thank you may please the court raj lot on behalf of the united states i want to start on this question of the materials relating to the deceased confidential informant it's not brady violently because those materials were irrelevant and it had out impact on the outcome of the trial that most important way there's two reasons why they really have no bearing on the trial the first time all of the examples cited in the detailed motions simply from the time period two thousand and five through two thousand and seven the time period that the government's evidence focused on the trial and the time period of all the rico predicates alleged in the indictment it was two thousand and ten and two thousand and eleven and it's the same reason why it's not relevant in the sense of the for the wiretapped an informant was no longer alive act would not provide information about the activities ongoing activities of the imperial insane vice lords the other key reason this information is irrelevant but also the material is hearsay so the council this morning argue that you would have called the court authors to task by about the contents of the report that would have not been admissible evidence that would have been  examination of the government's cooperating witnesses so the defense had the opportunity to make that argument except not a winning argument because there was ample evidence of structure of the game they had a name territory they had ranks and positions and the court was presented with evidence of the individuals involved in the game using those positions to accomplish the purpose of the game which was to control certain territory and s drugs there i want to clear up some confusion that with regard to the confrontation clause issue raised by mr martin first of all this was a bench trial so it's not a proven issue  the only way that there could be a confrontation clause eric here is the verse in the illinois situation where the district court expressly used another defendant's post arrest statement against a definit that absolutely did not happen here a couple of things that i think are the are you just heard may have caused some confusion so i want to clear them off the first is this reference to both of them in the understood that mr king was not in the current and that was a misunderstanding the evidence that mr martin knew what was going on came from several sources there are a number of recorded telephone calls about this incident and many of mr brown and ott because of his rape in the gang and because of all the communication among the coconspirators it really would defy common sense that mr martin didn't know the purpose of that harbor attention by that time the car was stopped mr martin had stepped outside of the car and the other three individuals were still seated inside so he clearly supports the inference reached in the conclusion reached by this report that all four of them had been together in the car on the district court's factual finding that mr martin's sentencing i think it is important to remember that this had no impact on the advisory guideline range and that there was no dispute that the district court finding a after more time to analyze the recorded calls more time to realize the significance of the government's evidence on this point which includes things like mr martin telling an imprisoned member of the imperial insane vice lords at time that it was on the popping to paraphrase that they were in a shooting war with the four corner hustlers keep in mind this happened just days after the murder of marcus hurley by andre brown at the same time they're plotting the murder of brian smith under thirty five fifty three a obviously the most significant thing about this is that it was like a plot to kill another human being whether it was technically in furtherance of the racketeering enterprise or not there's absolutely no reason to think it would have a difference in a sentence imposed by the district court particularly in the district court so that i would consider it either way frankly i think it's possibly even more aggravating if it's not in part a variance of the rico enterprise and just some  you know random additional murder plot that by the defendant would have been interesting questions on the remaining issues rest on the  it was before the district court at the joint appearance and the government presented that same evidence to the district court and was presented to district court in briefing on this issue the district court and finding that it was not in furtherance of the conspiracy after that hearing s