it is absolutely the requirement under the law that a defense lawyer investigate and prepare investigation in preparation necessarily include if at all possible on discerning what witnesses might be available to be  value to the defense in this particularly case the post conviction transcript reflects beyond any doubt that defense counsel was provided according to the petitioner and i believe defense called so who testified during the post conviction proceedings that the defendant made available to counsel somewhere between seven and nine names a couple of phone numbers a couple of addresses of individuals who were living at the home with h t and her mother between approximately nineteen ninety seven and the year two thousand why is that important because sometime in one nine hundred ninety nine or early two thousand and again time and he was gone for the better part of the year when he returned he returned to the same home for a short period of time and then by twenty of the read for s until he was about to graduate nursing school at that time they got back together they moved to arizona and as of the twenty yo ninety four years later what did the defense lawyer do retain coyer defendant out on bond he had his hands full with a defend dead who insisted that an expert be retained in order to discern whether there was false memory problems here the defendant never fall tied all the time den defendant's rejection and denials no why not because even the stepdaughter whose name was in the discovery h t's sister who said she prosecution what would they have testified the other daughter lauren would have testified that she lived in the same home with h t and her mother until the and there was no misconduct the benedict kind that she was ever aware of never heard of complaint never saw anything untoward now these people were living in a home that's not a arizona off for part of the time the other part of the time he was living in the heartland area where he was going was nursing school and that was from approximately twenty zero to two he graduated in the spring of twenty five during that time frame he actually owns the property in the heartland community that's where he was living and going to school defense counsel did nothing to support defendants version of those events although they're clearly part of a record now one of the things that occurs to everybody is a way to say there was a post conviction proceeding well at this point in time they depended this entitle to a reasonable level of that but could see in the post conviction there is some law does support the proposition today that in crank all post trial motion cases appointed counsel does have a responsibility and if the court would like that in that that they made up words to contact the renters and came up with nothing it was a cold trail in that the witnesses were just wrong mr will further testify that he spoke with defendant about hiring an investigator to try to find the ranters but the defendant didn't admission to row down any of the witnesses i asked the court to consider the august tenth twenty sixteen transcript and pages five to eight sixty to trying to locate you know what do you best contrary to what is written here my opponent can speak for himself but you're saying the record doesn't support that statement i truly do that this far a will say one thing my opponent is quite correct because mr pugh will then say something about not having the puns available to do an investigation or words similar words but whether he actually told the fan that that or not is a different matt justice terrorists that is a drug court from the record in my brief where he said we tried to find him they were just go he there may be some other statements that he made i don't recall but specific state we tried to find them they were gone is in the record and is a direct quote from the record and based upon that testimony the whole claim that he did not do anything at all to contact  is that the bennett was gone from the house a certain times during the course of the over the over the hears that evidence was forced jury so that the testimony of the r and ineffective assistance of counsel and not calling the sister the only claim was that he gave her the name of these rangers these bridges were not called and the claim was they made absolutely no effort but there's was that the defendant was careful to molest her at times when there was nobody else in the room where everybody was busy elsewhere so the testimony from the sister that i never saw anything i don't assistance in the transfer of if mation but that there was no prejudice to that effect it because the report that the two attorneys i didn't use was to a source  words they send in judge's findings regarding the reasons for is applied taking the trial court's factual findings and so it's not entirely clear what the real standard is because unquote is the fenice continued claim that killed did absolutely nothing to contact rivers that is the only factual dispute and the only testimony testimony to be credible given its findings it was not known according to the record why where they went when they moved on or that there was really any reasonable diligent way to locate  is that he found the test loria we don't know where they are to be credible because why else would he say it was not know where they were but he did not just as he or she did not make an explicit statement i find the it was not revealed until four five years later so we're look we're trying to find witnesses five six years after this but the facts basically say  thirty one there are the names of witnesses that this man in jail in the ideal seat with at least two phone numbers were able to present to the post twenty four and twenty five citing directly to the transcript i think the court will reasonably find that they did not look for any of the witnesses they were homeless they were this they were that but these are the same people the same joke of people on if i may where the prosecutors are going after drug dealers or people in games and they put up these same type of individuals as individuals that wait a second we prefer to put up choir schiemann and mob and doctors but these are the people that prosecutors now here the defendant's right and h p s mother had all these folks in their home for a period of seven six five we don't know for no one asked his side meaning of their with why i think the answer is that he twenty four and twenty five the opening brief referring directly to the court would be facing a two day trial man is serving the equivalent of life without parole that's the equivalent today serving the thirty years subsidy sixty four so when are you going to not use this medicine title and the law tells you this what is fundamentally fair was a trial reliable