so i don't get why the defendant didn't shout from the rooftops what this conviction was appealed and it was reversed on appeal and i never said to serve the time  well you know what i understand i understand that but i'm talking as a practical matter this is very different from the guilt phase where you can easily strip back in afford to sit back and let the government there its burden of proof here the government has put on evidence of a conviction and nobody challenges that they put on evidence of a three year sentence that was served and no one challenges that so the only issue comes up by the defendant t impeach that evidence and the best impeachment of that evidence is the defendant himself wouldn't at all incriminate him there is no risk no danger nothing to lose by the defendant saying i you had to i'm saying i don't know yet why it's a practical matter i defend it's facing and extra term in prison and would have any compunction at all about saying my conviction was reversed in his favor second as a practical matter and as a long time defense counsel i have to tell the court that many of our clients do not understand any of the legal niceties of what happened to them this is something back in one thousand nine hundred seventy eight here we were in two thousand and three and as a practical matter was made do you have a lawyer in that earlier case who could have been contacted for that information i'm assuming that he did have a lawyer since this was a without any records of it existing anywhere i'm not saying that there aren't any the guys didn't bring them in and they didn't get that they didn't look for them etc record page one eighteen and one i and this and this isn't just a preponderance of the evidence that there would be a greater probability that there could have been a reversal and it would not have been difficult for the government to make that inquiry they've met that they didn't do it and that's what is what is be extatic their burden of proof convincing i generally don't like want to buy these things i think it would be greater than eighty five percent but i point the court to well i guess i guess i guess right my question then is what is sentence of three years so the government not having had any pleas and you know this right at the end this would be the central issue focused on by the defendant sentencing relied on the fact that there was no evidence of an appeal at all in the rap sheets or issue at the time of sentencing i'm not sure i understood your answer to try murs question which was somewhat of an abstract question if the state comes farmer with information matter of practicality if there was any evidence of it the government is obligated to present that to the court and counsel to make sure that somebody isn't wrongfully and has a sense that was in fact overturned on appeal there is no evidence  sense was overturned on appeal in any documents that was submitted to the government or to the court and as such where as there is a general question we don't believe the government should bear that burden but in effect roundabout way they do because if there is evidence of an appeal they would move forward on it concede anything the council tribute to the government conceding as you can see on page one seventeen the comments the government was saying that page on the exhibit one represents something obviously it's a document but we never this document that gives concession in the district court additionally in response to your honor's question very briefly i know i'm out of time and the government should have to demonstrate what happened when there's a notice of appeal and mr terrorist admitted it in the district court that next year argument in