is greater than five years he was nothing more than an ounce level level distributors even the government acknowledged in its closing argument a trial had never been affiliated with any gang of crack cocaine to a couple of people who were either members of the system or sources of that gang he didn't have any history of violence didn't have any history of firearms or any other kinds of weapons  along with his motion to suppress in federal district court that he did not completely understand what agent detective gomez had asked him because he thought he said in his own words th detective who conducted the interrogation following the warnings and has your client ever claimed to have had any trouble communicating with him throughout th reading of spanish he said to the native speaker but the people of course had different directions when they read counseling you've put a lot of things up on the wall here i'm really surprised you started with this one because  here you've got a man who who was a native spanish speaker he was reading from a preprinted form as he went along he asked your client do you understand your client said yes according to him your client signed the form in spanish it's an official form he signed it he didn't raise a didn't request an evidentiary hearing before the court on this issue is this your strongest point we believe it is your honor let me quickly correct something i think you may have misstated the form that he signed i believe was from interrogation two thousand and one when he was arrested in connection with an earlier incident i don't believe that the record it appears that the detective gomez sugar almost testified that he did have the official car that he did read it that he did ask whether your client understood and he said he did he did specifically what is the basis is there any evidence other than his just general statement that he didn't understand very well he put anything else on besides that in terms of his lack of understanding  even i haven't confirmed with him regarding that i have no reason to doubt that that you wouldn't say that he actually in two thousand and one had the miranda rights read it sounds like he may have this memorized like a book you know he's he knows what this is i know the government made that claim your honor but of course it would be subject to examining him regarding that particular issue we also know in this is hearing throughout the record mr delgado is a long time substance abuser thousand that if there is a material issue of fact regarding allegations by a defendant that if proven true would lead to a motion being granted then the neven a jury hearing must occur s official car i speak spanish maybe not as well as your client does but the reality is lots of dialects of lots of all kinds of things but the reality is if you're reading from school book spanish this really straight forward there you don't have to worry about dialects you don't have to worry about slang you don't want to worry about any of that just reading a form i'm just having difficulty seeing where your client has put flash into his plane if he his right he realized that every non english speaking defendant in the world could make that claim if he or she wished to do so and what do we have then i mean the point is there has to be something to show specifically what it is that was not understood you can't say what i didn't really understand very much that doesn't work because of this issue it stated me or i and i agree we could have been even more details i think there was an entire interrogation that was conducted in spanish by deputy gomez the rights are recorded in any audio recording of the interview itself was introduced into trial and it's in the excerpts of record at pages eighteen thirteen to eighteen sixty four and in there deputy gomez interviews the defendant in spanish for about fifty pages and within that fifty pages there's not a single instance in which the judge said it says wait stop i don't understand spanish or i don't understand what you're saying where is the audio recording it was part of the evidence at trial but only the said that that back and forth in terms of him being read his rights and him agreeing to ways is also recorded and in the interview in other primary issue which was the motion for substitution of counsel the i'd actually like to ask you about the wiretap so he's made a bunch of arguments about the wiretaps and you did not argue that he lacked standing  the court case and i don't know how to say without the income from the sale of drugs without the income from the taxation of drug suppliers the gang would not have had its primary financial try to encourage mr martinez to plead guilty there might be some sort of claim based on that but with knowledge in the current record there isn't anything to suggest is there anything in any part of the record where this has been challenged by the ongoing duty to administer justice and determine what is just simply in a particular case to decide whether the taxpayers resources should be expended on incarcerating mr martinez of god it was not even a us citizen