session of the weapon on these two combined and the state threw in a charge of armed violence and it's it's our contention that the that the sentence was was extreme it was and in addition the prosecutor had failed to disclose a deal with one of the witnesses who basically was the only was the only evidence that my client had drug it seems as if the courts treat misdemeanors as not such as is just not such a damaging record as if the person made it to twenty three with a number of counties which happens on a lot of one of the factors in there of asian allowed to the court to use criminal activity in other words a charge that did not result in a conviction to as an aggravation factor  aggravation and it's just not correct on these type a site number three which states the defendant has a history of prior delinquency or criminal activity the state is was arguing that the the fact that there was criminal activity allowed the the court to use this charge that had not result in a conviction to do wrong as a factor in aggravation but if the if number three is read correctly it says a history of prior he also worked he had a fourteen month stint there one and one in the restaurant i believe and he was riego responsible father and he was getting ready to marry the mother of his trial attorney could have made an offer of proof for the sake of this court but you know we've all been there when the when the court tells you in so many words we're not going there and you honored that you you know first of all you're sitting right next to your client you don't really want to get a little by the court because you're you're asking questions that you know the court does not allow but my main argument as far as this disclosing the deal was they didn't get it out according to the law should have disclosed the the deal the promise of leniency she was that the only one in a superior she had superior access to information regarding the proof of leniency we were given deals in writing all the time before before the actual the scheduling conference and because this person was didn't this proportionate the sentence was disproportionate the sentence for the armed violence was disproportionate to the nature of the offense and the possibility of rehab the possibility of rehab should now be overlooked because this is a person that did have a potential to be rehabilitated this was a first time this charge of the felony and he was when you consider that the next month penalty for unlawful possession of a weapon is three years and the maximum is a sentence for unlawful possession of drugs three years  home the home alone purpose of armed violence schedule is due to deter collins from using dangerous weapons there by minimizing the deadly consequences which may result when a felony victim resists as my grief plays out this was a case where there was not a victim the person had he was the underlying pretty kid was for the armed violence w possession of a drug there is no victim when my person when my client was trained out of the car he kept repeating i'm not resisting i'm not resisting there was no baby down and if the purpose of the statute is to deter collins from using the here's weapons to minimize deadly consequences it's not the can they have nothing but a disproportionate penalty if there was not effect violence and it's you know it's it's because of the the the purpose of the armed violence statute it is up to this court to to look it over and say you know maybe  maybe maybe the sentence is proportionate maybe the state should not have charged him with this armed violence because you know armed violence it was an armed possession this was not a need this was not a crime of violence to possess drugs this is not a crime of violence on one last note on the the penalty or armed violence the penalty violates the proportionate penalty if it's cruel degrading and so wholly disproportionate to the offense committed as the shock and moral sense of  twenty three years for two individual convictions that would have raked in six years is wholly disproportionate it is degrading it's cruel and it's preventing the person from the possibility of rehabilitation this little child no longer has a father home so you know this is not a victimless crime and to prove defendant guilty of armed violence the they had me show that he was armed while with a dangerous weapon while they committed a felony that was not