state prison sentence and now an appeal the prosecutor's arguing that the plane error analysis applies i think in both of those arguments are certain flaws because i'm relying on eighteen u s c thirty five fifty three seat two as opposed to which is the sense right that's true so if he completes the first regardless of how it terminates he still is faced with the second so i don't i don't see what's wrong with that and that's within the guidelines i don't know why we're here well my argument is when you tack on forty six years to sixteen years in a state prison sentence which is going to do at least eighty five percent because it's a strike within the california system that means two hundred thirty months as opposed to forty six months so i think the sentencing law the policies underlying the sentencing law specially those policy statements in eighteen u s c thirty five fifty three require the court to not  sentence i e if this is two separate full consecutive federal robberies the low term on that would be ninety two months because he's tacky and on to a sixteen year state prison sentence it goes up to two hundred thirty eight months so sentence so we gave him forty six months everybody agreed that nine months had to be knocked off anyway because of the time he'd already served both you and the government i think agreed i'm not sure you know i was a little bit unclear i was down there with the judge and you know only thing the judge did at least in my estimation was knock it down from fifty seven months which is the high end of the guy and i raised to forty six months which is low and i'm on range and which was looks to me like all the good was inadvertently only knock off two months but maybe that's not correct maybe it is to me something got lost in the imposition of the well there was a lot of dialogue about how much he was hurt because there was a taser on him and he wasn't getting a good time work time credits while he's sitting around for twenty six months in federal custody serving his time of state prison sentence so there was a lot of dialogue about that and the message information really clarify in d p s are because we don't really know and it wasn't addressed and p s r how much he was really actually penalized by sitting in the federal system and being unable to earn his good time work trying credits during that twenty six month lost as a result of this because credits and the factors to be taking into account and so your honor i don't know how that came up and i can't answer that because i mean i basically state court practitioner and i just don't know how to judge and i know judge carr he a state court judge i'm not sure how you arrive at that nine months it was just a rough calculation i don't know i can't answer that question but my ardent would have been i would have gladly have suffered a departure above and beyond fifty seven months rather than have you know the low end of the finite range and then they fully consecutive to a sixteen year sentence and my argument is when you're talking about and assuming it was just you know going above the it was a departure upward you know the judge would have had to state more specific reasons that he did in this particular case so i'm arguing when you jack a sentence up from four to six months to result in a two hundred thirty eight month sentence when you compute both men together you know at least we that eighty five percent or sixteen years it's going to be i think i kept that in my movie papers twelve to fourteen years before he's eligible for release and then he's going to be turned over to the federal authorities to start his forty six month consecutive sentence and i just think that the basic justification but here we're talking about a sixty two situation where the law is very clear that the court shall specify or give specific reasons not just generic reasons like in c one specific reasons and thirty five fifty three eight factors is insufficient and then also no plane error analysis applies to this situation either because there is a case us to be make belfour forty four the third eleven seventy three eleven seventy eight court found that a reasonable sentence was forty six months imposed consecutively to the sixteen year term of imprisonment imposed by the state court this was not an upward departure as the defendant would like to you to believe and to adopt in order to rationalize their argument that thirty five fifty three c two should apply that's just not the situation in this case the defendant also like this court to adopt a more formal and almost ritualistic recitation of the factors and this court has consistently rejected that approach and gives the district court the ability to view cases and if the appropriate provisions are before the court and the record indicates that the court considered the facts underlying those provisions that the district court properly discharged its obligation i think that's what happened in this case the pre sentence report cited five g one point three particular guideline provision nor go through it systematically does not indicate that it did not properly consider the factors of the first factor in the guidelines is consideration of section thirty five eighty four regarding multiple senses which then goes back to thirty five fifty three in the record is clear that the district court considered that instance that of the nature and circumstances of the offense the district court specifically remember the codefendant in this case and the personal characteristics of the fent the court recognized the family in the court room listened at length to defendant's comments about his rehabilitation and the corpus needed to go through the other factors totality both giving the credit for that time was a consideration that the district court made after listening to the defendant and in addition he came back down all the way to where the probation in the p s r had recommended which was  district court down below zero zero record or the record an obligation to recycle more criteria to justify the specific reasons mandated by speak to as to why he gave the fully consecutive