and secondly that the expectation of privacy of my clients in the tb here is independent and separate from the right of privacy in his house so what i'm saying is that's two different things although there is a own property and therefore deserves the same if not more protection of the year in terms of the motion to suppress my correct that the evidence that the appellant wants to suppress the spend in the house not in the team that's correct ok so if they had a right to be outside the t p and from there they observed the house in the condition that led them to enter the house but what is it why do we have to focus on the expectation of privacy in the t v well at least they did in my initial thinking about the case i was getting past that and asking myself  pertinent but here we are dealing with their decision to enter the house in the evidence they then found in plain view in the house so why does it matter whether they and they found no signs of struggle inside the t v so it wasn't until that point that they decided to go to the house and so basically what i'm saying because there was initially illegal intrusion in the tepee everything they did after that because of what they inside the t p the could be heard and then i don't even if they had probable cause to look in the t v for evidence of the shooting or whatever they still didn't have a warrant to go in there or permission to go in there saloons that's certainly an argument your honor but i think that's speculation and also it's pretty clear that the these officers arrived at least around two hours after the incident happened so i'd be unlikely that a perpetrator would still be there there's evidence supposedly that mr cook and actually slept in his bedroom in the house and there's no evidence city slept in the tent that somehow extinguishes a right of privacy in the t v but i'm arguing that it's not determ the facility or the or the fia in this case and there really is no evidence on that in this case so i'm just making suggestions but the all of our case said you look to whether there can be intimate  activity concerning the sanctity of man's life or the privacy of life in the place other than a house and clearly a tepee is a place can be a place for meeting can be a place where gathering can be a place for in the fall and winter when it's cold that we have people intensive put stoves to keep themselves warm but i think that's an exception normally people sleep in tents but they carry out their other daily activities cooking whatever gathering outside the tent around the questions about them i would like to make a couple of points about what mr donovan has said so far about some of the core courses questions are respect to whether or not the officers would have gone to the house anyway i think it's clear out of the law that they could have gone to the house anyway and of course at that point would have seen the broken down door and all the other evidence that would have naturally let them inside with respect to whether or not they would have i would of anything even a lot of people being there and they describe it as nice and tidy with nothing under stirred i think it's safe to assume from that that the officers would indeed have proceeded to the house because the undersheriff immediately afterwards says things weren't house what is the emergency that authorizes them to go inside and mean it's been hours  extreme violence in the house the people have reported what is clearly shitty have not told the truth there may be other victims the people who've reported the shooting perhaps the perpetrators of something else nothing in the tent that necessarily leads to that already other than an absence of that's what they're expecting to be there to leave the house i think it's inevitable that these officers are going to be at the house finding what they find