no direct right of appeal in state court for the civil contempt finding the only available remedies did you go to the court of appeal yes we did but the only remedy available was through a petition for special action which is an extraordinary we have all where there is really a twofold finding before special action would be exercised yeah that's this is all abstraction where you go on the point is that the courts of the arizona court of appeals died that finding of fact because unless you can show that that's clearly erroneous it seems to me to use the vernacular your get in the water because that's the issue i understand that argument your honor but i believe that this court is really our only remedy it points to seek redress hero but you've got to show that that's dead wrong you know clearly erroneous let's put it in those terms it's got to have the stench of the seven day old dead and refrigerated fish according to the sec circuit and there's there's extensive litigation ongoing in mexico the property here let's property that my client allegedly owns is all of mexico he's stuck in the bank all that by him and all kinds of confusion well if the part of the record talks she has won the lawsuit now the siblings have appealed what even though she's won that judgment she still can't liquidate that property so that you get money out of this that i the way i read this record not only has your feeling though and we're in appellate court and we've got a state court finding a fact after an evidentiary hearing that says that it's not you've got a high hill to climb to crime to convince us that this is a bad foundation for the ruling the feeling is really a bad choice a motion in the trial court done in the spirit court and there was testimony from my client that has not been controverted by the healthy carmen testified she offered to sell the property and used the money to get respondent out of jail he told her not to challenge the constitutionality of the being held in court i think this violate of of due process he can get out of jail he can resolve the transaction and let's look at your client is the author of all of this on the problems the minute he's looking at these orders and he started hiding the property everywhere and record is clear that there was that four hundred twenty thousand dollars that if you read the entire trial this was said to never explained where it went he also never explained the fact that he continued to operate all of the community businesses until he transferred them away in two thousand where all the court specifically waive the exhaustion requirement so if your client is willing to do that you won't have to go back to war over astron and do all that you can start getting through that to the issues in the case in which the party skipped over to secure that but without doubt i'm intimately familiar with her her philosophy of financial circumstances and there's a long history of perceived a delay in this case tony which has caused great consternation and expense to her and i have no doubt that to record below in making his decision and upholding it with the same strong factual finding the protections for sanctions are far fewer this civil contempt maybe imposed in an ordinary civil proceeding on the contrary this court found in one thousand nine hundred three in the dual deck video case that the standard is clear and convincing evidence so the appeal fails on that basis as well and certainly the request seems to be that under crocker he wasn't given the opportunity to they needed to be a post deal and we litigated that issue in front of judge nichols and he found under our local rules of evidence that they were appropriately admissible under our rules that crawford suggests whether local rules of evidence can or cannot been beyond a reasonable doubt not according to this court's standard of clear and convincing from one thousand nine hundred three and tools act and then thirdly the issue of crawford which simply doesn't have any basis in either fact or law especially was a little disingenuous given the fact that i objected pockets and your honor i simply can't and he never demonstrated that he couldn't sit still and after a four day trial which he waited two years to ask for and one of the probation and seven hundred fifty dollars fine it's been thirty six months it's been three years and over thousand days my client has been incarcerated system see is the hobgoblin of small minds what happened to the four hundred twenty thousand dollars did he take it out of him yes apparent the money had been transferred to to mexico however i now he doesn't graced with an explanation of what happened i believe he did explain that the money was because pay off the employees that he had to lay off and in effect what ended up happening he lost all his businesses because of not only the garnishments no i disagree with some of the facts that the appellate his raise with regards to their argument