i can tell you what my interpretation is looking at the record it sounded what he not so much secure condition that he could never talk mr hurd could never talk to his attorney without other inmates being around to me that meant by so we really don't know what the circumstances are great what's important for getting what the circumstances are what's important is trial counsel in the middle of trial he did not feel he had enough asking me to comment on hypothetical situations that the the client is not being forthcoming and if if it is your position that there was an explanation for that or that it required further elaboration wasn't invited i don't mean you personally but let's wasn't it the burden of mr hurd or his representatives to develop the facts in the state court and say look i received ineffective assistance of counsel typically without parole he's been sentenced to so life is something better and what bothers me when i think should bother the court is how can you advise a client to reject any offer if you don't know the full parameters so he thought she was going to take the fifth and never testify so he thought he was never going to have a trial that's really what he's saying the point is how can he advised his client to accept or reject any offer if he doesn't know the case failed to investigate if i won by making sure he could put his client in a comfortable place to tell him everything is top of the high path hypotheticals i think the lawyer and this is a tough thing to murder let's strike a special circumstance and the gun enhanced men and trial counsel say oh forget it don't worry about it we got this perfect self defense you'll testify will be fine even know that he was saying that and that's what i think we need evidence you're hearing for because what we do know what we have  mister sometimes the most important thing to advise a client is not to go to trial and accept the offer because you have problems and so if you accept the offer of life with the  i think that what needs to be done here is really determine what is an offer made or not to trial counsel have enough information and what do you recommend is what i want to just to be clear what is the record information then so it's clear to see that any time prior to that he did not have enough and he did not have enough to advise his quality to accept or reject an offer that clearly was given we just don't know what the offer  voluntary manslaughter defense i think with respect to those claims there is no need for an evidentiary hearing and this court can certainly reject those claims based on the phone point the jury in this case had the opportunity to come back with second degree murder it didn't came back with first degree murder and a winding way delegation which under california law and a lot of whining in wait which under california law requires a finding equivalent to premeditation and deliberation the california court of appeal in rejecting the voluntary manslaughter the uncertified issue the voluntary manslaughter instruction issue now and that even if that instruction should have been given any error was harmless because the jury lady's dorm room where petitioner did not with and then somehow the victim showed up the prosecution in contrast presented all the evidence that petitioner and his friend accomplice david  correct you know i'd really like to respond to the questions the court might have on any of the issues well i guess my question is this  worry about in this case because of the accomplish and then the trash that's my question is what how does it set up in terms of whether the a reasonable tactical defense based on the evidence and based on what they were able to come up with it just didn't work at various points throughout the trial and assigned some level through the evidence of what sort of thing the court made the following comment first the courts that and i'm paraphrasing now in general you never really know what the truth is you have different practical use capable i am unaware of any attorney that i have any knowledge about either current or historical who could have made the facts in this case if you're any differently to the jury than they didn't this trial and that's in volume sixteen at  eleven years or life is a factual situation that's really not important what's important is it was an offer made before trial and did the defendant have a trial counsel who  fully aware of the facts to advise him to accept or not is there anything you and mr hurd's declaration that if he had been offered life imprisonment twenty five years to life he would have jumped was presented in the lower federal court on a factual situation like present a letter brief quickly and submitted to counsel and i plucked i don't think ok you better think about this offer let's give yourself a chance to get out of prison someday instead of rushing forward with this trial and not knowing what you're doing and that's essentially what he said at the x party memory serves me also that it's ok to make strategic decisions but you have to investigate and if you don't investigate that's not a proper strategic decision i believe that's a u s supreme court case like williams which is thompson i couldn't