the contrary on that we certainly wish to preserve that issue the second issue that however relates to the district courts around us application of the sixteen level and an mr lopez the sentencing based upon the district court's determination that he had a prior felony for a crime of violence specifically violation of for several reasons one is that the crime of violence definition contained in the guideline to l one point two with worse to the a numerated violations doesn't fall into marvel write properly that type thing and then the otherwise approve h and the containing an element of risk of physical harm to a person this statute may apparently be they define in half the dead within that statute and the statute is set out in full in both my brief and the government's they do not however define occupied as it relates to vehicle well so what we're not sure of what occupied under the california statute go down the side track here that i was hoping to not have the court go down the real issue here your honor is that the government in response to objections prior the sentencing via mr lopez's counsel as lopez's counsel discussed the fact that one problem is that the statute allows for punishment of not less than six months or more than twelve months that's one reason the statute would not meet the definition because under guideline to one point two it requires said it be a felony for a crime of violence so the statute invites a definition would not necessarily involve a felony the count mr lopez has counsel objected prior to sentencing saying the statute is overbroad because of the defamation it is overbroad because response to mr lopez's counsel's objections and with the also specifically noted that an abstract of judgment from california has been held by this court inaba dad marcos to not be a judicially noticeable document she said the government has to prove this she also said a summary and a pre sentence report is not sufficient proof then when they go to court the government submit a charging information they submit a municipal court document where in the case is bound over our belief they use that terminology certified up to circuit court there then is an abstract in judgment abstract of judgment that is the and all of that is in the actual record those of the documents court at page fourteen that those documents are themselves insufficient to prove the fact of the conviction but the government then further takes the position that french the p s r said that he got four years it must be a felony well unfortunately the government appears to have overlooked the fact the counsel for mr lo whether or not two forty six is categorically a crime of violence the district court agreed or the district court believe that it had to use the modified categorical approach there was no objection from the government at the sentencing hearing to the got through the district courts use of the categorical approach the problem here is the failure of the government to submit judicial noticeable documents showing not what the question is not what was he charged with the question as this court is uniformly held after title or what was he convicted based on the documentation we the county jail for term of not laughs than six months and not exceeding one year that that takes this out of the felony definition contained in what i normally one looks at the sentence actually that regard is evolved statement in the p s are off and and abstract of judgement neither of which under the law of the circuit have been found to be adequate in proving th the actual crime committed or the sentence imposed and i'm out of time if i might have one minute one to forty six penal code and that is signed by a judge so we don't have the abstract a judgment problem whereas a court was concerned understandably that at apparently they include generated documents not signed by a judge so we have a other documents i have mentioned it does specifically indicate fent was sentenced to three years into court head of his music government has curates pergamon the court's decision finding this was a felony crime of violence should be affirmed fact if the court looks at that particular document it will see that the judge actually set bond for the defendant at that same proceeding in the amount of twenty thousand dollars that still does not tell us what the superior court did what charge mr lopez was actually convicted of and sentenced for and my time is up  affirm on any fair reason within the record thank you