about the rules but maybe some of the later ones are not familiar that we have the traffic light system we have a yellow light that comes on at eighteen minutes and when you have two minutes left we appreciate your winding up when the red light comes on please you can conclude unless the court is asking you a question we are we also very much appreciate hearing record citations when those are applicable will be on the prejudice arising in this case from mr hunt's being in constructive possession of a firearm owned by another person in a trailer in which he lived with his girlfriend and which was owned by his mother who lived next door that offense tried with the marijuana sites which involved act is this is suspected pakis of marijuana being mailed from california to court decision we're still in direct appeal yes we can we can talk about that but you you please go back to your server again and i believe that the case came out hard to ignore it but i think that we have  to show constructive possession of the jury have inferred that the a k forty seven was in a closet for up to four years could a reasonable jury have inferred that well of a gun in the closet we use is important in this case we don't know that about the gun the only reason why we know the gun was found was to the presentation of hearsay by the government and permissible hearsay that a gun was found  a believe the witness said i believe the gun was found in the closet and nothing else we don't know was an awful a closet off the bedroom that the that again the witness says layout of the trailer or anything like that the government doesn't say that you know there's belongings of mr hunt's parent next to the gun well there was no question it was a trailer and he lived in it that is there is no question somewhere in the in the closet and of course you know not only that but i would it would if he live with his girlfriend we do know that his mother owns the it lives next door and seems to exercise dominion over this trailer she intercept packages that are delivered there the gun was left with her and did end up in the closet so you know that the jury could there's a nothing there for good works that should require the government to shove that that gun was either in plain view always next belongings that belong to mister sperry but well i understand that we have cases in which th scenario is presented yet we are guns in plain view and so the jury can make the inference or the gun is found among the belongings so the jury can make that inference but my question is is it is that in your is that the outer balance of mean is something i believe that you know that language in the case marcus in is that there has to be something well sure we who you we in that case you are in that case heavily understand why did we say in we say for example of this may come from a's a but i think it's also quoted in murders and that what we're looking for is quote evidence supporting at least a plausible inference that the defendant had knowledge of an access to the illegal item that seems to be the target we're pointing out trying to figure out from a plausible yes and and given that language you have a court that says and and how i we had felon in possession this court reversed on on sighing that it was an improper fair your savva because the jew it got to hear that there was a prior conviction in a case where the fire arm wasn't related to the underlying charges and where that information would not of come to the jury on a trial just on the non weapons of fences and we think that that's of parallel we have here now the evidence of that the one of the the key things is court looks to is the strengths of the evidence the evidence of the drug charges a certainly is not it's not in significant but what this court has said says it must be  quote the court is whether this cork in say that the evidence what so overwhelming that the jury was not in fairly influence by the fact that they were judging a felon and it we we look to the jury's quit all of the net she had the post she was supposed to work she had the post office box she had all those packages came in her name except the ones that went to the cantor more her cousin she picked them up all the time she was down to routinely intercept packages government but the last one of those was delivered to her at her instruction even though it had to borrow hundreds buries a trailer address on it she brings it home they execute a search warrant and it's in the bathroom r really got  and that it's important because it has a lot to do with the far end of the straw i'm just wondering why you wouldn't write why you wouldn't want to sever the case and then and then be able to write well it's obvious why they don't want to sever the case they want to tell the jury that you got a felony right and that's correct and by the way this is no secret well and that's an element of the possession crime i think what you're saying is that strengthens argument for supper and it's right oh i so that you have no apparently you have no copy of the judgment that was entered in that in that case in his sex offense case correct but not because i'm taken your word for it i mean it looked like statutory rape to me but anyway if that's a felony is it a practice for the judgment to say you mean opposite a firearm issues whether a new is official evidence that he knew his status as somebody who had been convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year i think is what the statute says right yes i know he was a felony and so this was carnal knowledge of a juvenile i mean i i looked in the record and found the supplemental p s r that said he pled no contest received a suspended two years incarceration and you have any reason to doubt that i have no reason to doubt  sufficiency of the evidence arguments i'll try to do the same i also try to hit on some of the raw eve concerns and that may make the presentation of them jumbled but try to hit on some of the concerns that the six the fact that it was an urge to lie i think explains why the district court didn't engage in an extensive discussion of why rule eighteen and it was appropriate but i would suggest that it certainly wasn't this case and the case law from this but it's sort of what's the logical relationship now the district court rely on on three different cases principly bola fortenberry and par and all of those involve situations there was an investigation where bonds were found in the course of the investigation in at least a couple of them there was a search warrant that was executed and so the question became well do we send was that transactional aspect of the rule of the rule a join very close to this particular case because it was also a drug and gone sort of case council was to distinguish particularly bullock and fortenberry on the grounds that those cases were not drug and gun cases and that which equally in bogan fortenberry involve defenses that would have already gotten the fact of the gun before the jury bought the alleged presence in this case is not the fact that the jury heard about the gun the alleged prejudice in the case is just taken by them once out the fact that the jury hears about the prior found conviction but this court noted i think the case i cite in my brief un and that's just not been the practice of this poor in all of the cases that i just signed instead and well it is the case we cite for this i think it's our best case on that because the limiting instruction is exactly the language that was approved and we see prejudicial he didn't have to accept that stipulation and we could have done something to let me ask you a question in the course of reaching this stipulation was there evidence of where where does the evidence or information about the jury find out that he was a felon we knew that he was a fellow well i don't want to know how you knew i know you knew but how did you know in other words somebody must have had a copy of a judgment from somewhere well that sandwich i mean it's one of the questions you ask counsel it's not in the racket so as we stand here today because this was never contested the fact that conviction was never contested in the district court he stipulated to it  he didn't object to it i guess that's because of the impact of red tape maybe but i think that could have been although i'm going to head to the raw official you know this is this is one of these cases where i think you defend it would have to jury need to know where the phone and the guns on irrelevant to come into evidence and the question of were dealing drugs and so forth that it characterizes the crime but that's not the point the point is the characterization stipulation if you go ahead to the pretrial conference when the judge makes a ruling on the motion to savva that's the st time you see and it could well as a scene i can't remember which is like whether the district court thought the nature of the prior offense would be very prejudicial in this case because it was carnal knowledge of a juvenile and it just seemed points out it was an eighteen year old defendant and a twelve year old girl and an actual sex attack more than one look or say the implication that he was dealing drugs out of out of the trailer no there was no evidence that he was dealing drugs out of the trailer when the search warrant was executed the  officers found a scale a digital scale which is consistent with trafficking they found this composition book that an officer testified including consistent with being a drug ledger and finding two bags of marijuana into boys residence that is not correct and i explain how the confusion with that comes out i think what is correct is that the officers found one opened of marijuana that was consistent with the sealed bags they had found in other seizures there is a confusing picture in the record this is an hour away eight hundred and eighty seven it shows the a k forty seven dollars the pistol and of largish bags of marijuana and it looks like that all came out of the same place but there was later explanation that i found last night as i so you do have that you have that that there was some sort of indication that at least at some time he had had a significant distribution type quantity of marijuana in residence i mean you also have an inference i hold a fair quantity you can if they did they would hold and i think one of the things that made all of these shipments so suspicious was they were all approximately the same weight so most of these shipments contained about two or three pounds of sentence of incarceration of two years the defendant served the entire three years he had to register as a sex offender he went through a revocation proceeding because he wanted to cohabitate with a woman who had a  of conviction was called felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile louisiana has two statutes down a good of a juvenile is elysium revised statutes fourteen call an eight misdemeanor is eighty point that it was a he never denied that he was a prohibited person and the a possible rai argument would be that because the conviction and had some age on it that maybe he would have forgotten but you know we would have a jury bought by someone else by the girlfriend it was underneath a mattress so it was not only was it not in plain view but i would call it hidden which is which is different from a gun being in a closet a gun in a c the night of new year's eve two thousand and ten brought into his residence put it in the closet and it remained there for four years even if he did not pick it up as the district court pointed out the jury could have inferred that in four years time he would have seen a gun of that size shape and dimension there with the jury the actual gun was introduced in evidence of the jury saw the actual firearm and there are pictures of it that were substitute in  looking for is a reasonable inference evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer that he was exercising some kind of dominion over the far right and so this thing was found in a closet jury could have thought could have eighty seven dollars shows the magazine in the gun of the record doesn't reflect whether the magazine was actually in the gun but even if it wasn't the magazine alone is a substantial contraption this is one of these sort of curved magazines probably not your honor but again i think it's the district court's point is this is a sizable weapon it's not the sort of thing that you could put in a little shoe box stuff in the back and no one would ever see your time that photograph  were actually found and he says now that was that's my handwriting that was a press photo the two bags came out of the next house in the control delivery package but those are the guns and so you can see the pistol you can see the a case forty seven  both had loaded magazines and you can see all of that depicted in that particular picture thank you ok thank you i think it's important to note one thing and i take responsibility for this not being clear but the record is the record the sergeant with a deputy sergeant with the sheriff's office said he found marijuana suspected marijuana in the scale in jabari hunt's berries trailer i don't think if you can rely on that as being true for several reasons one of the postal inspector said no marijuana exhibit picture in exhibit twelve it's a bathroom scale and it was found in the not hunt's barry's house furthermore there is a return on the search warrant it i and eighty four hour wait fifteen a for it says what was what was found during that search there is no mention of drugs or scaling this is important because back to the severed question is there a connection between the gun and the drugs there was no drug activity occurring at mr hyde sperry's house and that is what distinguished that's what makes this case like macarthur we believe that's what hundred and sixty two cartridge clips it is not our right jury can reason for that that's the kind of weapon that that's how they run into drug trafficking in the character the gun itself is relevant but i think that that's just a general that's not true but they're not bird hunting gun and it is not but a but then again it's not even his it you know we still have to deal with a problem you know it's not even his  thank you very much your court appointed here i say so thank you very much it's always a pleasure to see