as an adult i'd like to reserve some additional time for bottle in this case we seek reversal of the transfer in this case based upon three issues one the failure of the government to file the juvenile records all the juvenile records that were in existence at the time for brandon p prior to the transfer as required by the statute eighteen u s c section fifty thirty two two violation of the speedy trial provisions of the  that particular issue that the court in the in bank decision left open the issue of whether pollution between the federal authorities and tribal authorities do of course involved a transfer of a native american as well as this case if there was collusion between the federal authorities and the tribal authorities that there may be grounds for starting the detention sooner then when the first person goes into federal custody i would ask the court ending or additional briefing on this issue because doe changed the law on that and we didn't have an opportunity in the district court to address those particular issues on speedy trial  came down after fact during the briefing process or after the briefing process and in this case what i would like to focus on is your only claim as a speedy trial as to the thirty day thirty day rule nothing that happened after march  judge entered the order transferring him to be tried as an adult ok between that and then the date of march tenth until the day of transfer are you making a claim of speech or a trial that violations no we're not making a claim on a speedy trial by lation psychiatric evidence which would unrebutted psychiatric evidence which was presented that there was a realistic chance of branded p could be rehabilitated within the five years available to the district court let me just focus briefly on the on the records  pointed out that that section is mandatory what it changed was the previous ruling of this court that the failure to provide the records jurisdictional defect it's that it was not those that it was not a jurisdiction records juvenile court records they admit there was no certification of records from mckinley county new mexico gallup new mexico and they had met that there were no records provided for offenses charged against some cases parker long in g b from other circuits and g b in fact i've pointed out specifically said that the provisions of fifty thirty two are mandatory and that the the government is required has the burden of whiling all of those records prior to the transfer did you object that the all records had not been transferred that's an excellent question your honor  well because it wasn't necessary in this case because maybe it was anyway that you didn't object i didn't object on october seventeenth because the district court ordered the government to provide certified copies of all juvenile court records so between october seventeenth and twenty ninth the government had the opportunity to file those records at any time when was i going to object this is not like the joke a square there was an actual disposition hearing at which the defendant's lawyer could have objected to the failure of the government to provide those records there was no such hearing prior to that there's no such dispositional or or there was no hearing at the time the judge entered the transfer or the judge simply entered written order on october twentieth was filed on october twenty ninth and the government had been given two weeks to pile the records on october  mr hoyle to do so if he found some at they needed to be further raised with the court and even as we sit here today there is no suggestion that the records or the quote missing records were inaccurate went to the reliability of that fact finding that the court needed to engage in and in fact as the government points out and it's the district court did not rely on the missing records as any part of its discretionary decisions to petition to revoke probation and she listed the tribal charges as one basis for protection for her petition to revoke probation the navajo county records of course were certified and one thing that the court is required to see the official juvenile records and the court was concerned that what is or is not required is required to consider the official juvenile court records the court had a question in its own mind as to whether or not those official juvenile court records must always be certified this court has never said that the certification requirement clearly goes to the non existence of records when those cannot be statute is in part what the government relies on but again i guess i want to make my argument accurate the court asked for certified records the government should supply them all however the only complaint here certainly does not go to whether or not any the court's order analyzing the six mandatory factors is very very well supported in the record the defense has only objection to that seems to be the defense would like to read in a requirement that a court finding be only based on expert testimony but that's that's not the law and the court take carefully follow and make findings on each of the six required factors and the court with entitled to engage rely on some factors more than others  and the single biggest weakness in the defense's argument is that even dr rosen wives testimony was predicated on self reporting by the juvenile which was provably inaccurate based on the found the records were inaccurate because they did not include the homicide charge the very same events that are charged in federal court were the big it's just a homicide charge in the tribal court were there any psychiatric evaluations in the in the tribal court concerning transfer was brandon p transferred by the tribal court what evidence was taken in the tribal court concerning whether he should have been transferred to be tried as an adult or the tribal court make that decision it is far as i know the travel court can make that decision to try something as an adult i think and the fact that he may not have been transferred in the tribal court on the homicide charge the very same charge he was facing in federal court would have been helpful to the brand and the juvenile in the transfer proceeding in federal court we don't know because we don't well he was held in tribal court for seven months in juvenile detention in tribal court for seven months before the government thing to sort of occasion to charge him federally during that seven month period of time he faced charges two two thousand and two and it involves a homicide charge which was the same as the charge in federal court so he can be charged in tribal court and in federal court united states versus wheeler there's no there's no double