guilty and was given an order that had the power in terms of provisions in it it's contained in our opening brief in the appendix i'm not going to read all of the conditions i agreed to participate in the program for a period of up to thirty six months during which time sentencing will be deferred pending successful completion of the program i agreed to fully cooperate with and follow the instructions of the drug court i agreed to abate all  and not consume use or have in my body the presence of controlled substances or alcohol there are twenty one conditions and a three page document that looks like probation walks like probation acts like probation and in fact is probation now i want the court to be very clear this is not a challenge for the drug court hey opt for the drug court proceedings drug court proceedings drug courts have been created all across the state of illinois we're not challenging those in this case but drug courts are courts and courts follow the law and the impact of this case and the impact of the proceedings in this case are plain and simple mr carter entered a plea of guilty to a not probation  author of people versus anderson and people versus anderson he recognized that the drug court program is a form of conditional liberty like supervision probation or parole and that's what happened here that's granted he did not follow those terms and indeed he was back before the court twice and it was the second time that he was back that the court said no we're not going to allow you to stay in krug court you're going to  twelve years in the party record but for a period of time he was on what was essentially probation and no matter what you call it it was probation and every step of the way in his proceeding all the parties the judge the state's attorney his counsel acted as if he were on probation when he came back to court at one point the state's attorney said we have to proceed in this fashion as if it were a fish and repo and that's because of the least thinking well what could have been done or is there any way that mr carter could have proceeded in a fashion that is i believe consistent with the drug court yeah  to have you plead guilty to a non probation about balance so we can leave for that possible thirty year sentence hanging over your head and then put you in a probation setting in this in  a case is there a way for the court to keep that thirty year sentence if that's what they wish to have class one sentence hanging over mr carter certainly and they do that by having violated a term or condition of their base then they could have said all right we're going to the next step we're going to have either a trial or we're keeping the class one felony in place here and now you can either plead to that or you can  d not guilty and we'll have a truck but what they can't do is what they did in this case which is cut the baby in half have it both ways however you want to phrase it they can't keep this probation they can create a sentence here the legislature didn't create the legislature created the sentence for mr carter's case it was a class one felony for which he could not receive probation the  could not perhaps you see probation for a class two if the legislature wants to add something into the truck or an act that says those dispositions i'm ira proprium those can be done by trial courts i don't have a problem with that extreme hypothetical but under your that theory under that reading if mr connor had been charged let's say with a class four felony and mr perry come to the court and said i would like to be considered for drug court and the court said no your record is too long i don't think you're a good risk project for drug court if mr carter had said to the court i have a proposal for you and here's my proposal i'm so confident that i can succeed in drug court and i will plead guilty to this class four felony with the understanding that if i cannot successfully complete drug court you can satisfy me twelve years in prison that's in a legal sense now that's the authority of this court and that's the only on remedy available under these circumstances and again i'm not quarrelling with drug court that's not the issue here but drug courts must follow the law just as any other court and under these on seven thirty one six six and zero eight which our position is created the power of the jurisdiction over this particular section and only exclude certain offenses which are listed as just her already pointed out it will read number four and notice that in those explosions or criminal sexual assault and then if you go back to five three two which there for so know what was going and the only offenses it wasn't excluded from the drug court treatment act are listed there and i think you have to read the statutes to give them a harmonious effect and when you do that you find that this section was intended to address the connection between drugs criminal behavior and it was intended to apply to paragraph which i'm not going to waste anybody's time by reading it but it says in effect in layman's language putting these guys in jail doesn't work just try something else if they're only coming in here because of a drug problem let's try something else let's turn it over to the people who have previous records for violent crimes perhaps being allowed into a drug court situation if in fact it's only drug court people that we're dealing with for drug offenders possession offenders or perhaps the sale of offenders i list them again this is an exclusion well you know it's not it's not a question of exclusion it's a question of a legal sentence the drug court act nowhere says oh by the way we're mr carter happened to have one of those and under those circumstances to then say what we're going to allow to plead guilty and receive what is in fair sentence of probation is not what the legislature could have and then they intended for people to go into a very structured environment an environment consistent with hope calm most in intensive probation and if there was a violation then they would be dealt with accordingly all i'm suggesting is that the language of the spec of the act itself if we accept this argument that well if the statute didn't  judge and before sentence in certain cases we're going to place people in this drug court the program and if those people facing a very lengthy possible prison sentence and no possibility of parole or probation do not comply with the terms inappropriate because it's one of two things either it's probation without falling or probation or it's a suspended sentence without the where the legislature has no authority bukhara by the court has no authority to do that i'm so if i were circumstance believe it was as well that that may have also rendered him ineligible for this process but the court didn't think didn't consider that but he had a prior drug offense that i think is what triggered i can't recall now specifically but that may have understanding that he was going to be placed in drug court that in fact he was told if you successfully complete drug court we're going to bring you back and sentence if it's illegal for one of two reasons reason number one because the sum and substance of what happened here was that he was placed on probation when probation was not an appropriate seventy illegalities out there yes we've just we've discussed that it may also one could argue at least this court is going to allow trial judges to suspend sentences for up to three years we could have a serious problem on our hands we had here's the problem just a sample and i think in a very  all of us have perhaps remember the days in the seventy's when every court in illinois had something they call supervision that the statute the legislature had never contemplated some every county did it differently finally legislature came in with one court started to look at those cases and said you know we need to create a statute here that deals with this problem the supervision staff you listen to me i'm suggesting to the court that that's what's happened here there is a gap between the drug court practice and that's the legislative intent and the legislative classification of sentences and that's what needs to be addressed thank you thank you