motion for reduction of sentence mr know that you have still doubt the form included the criminal case number marked that he wanted on appeal that the federal public defender that represented him on the seventy trafficking organization that smoke over nine thousand pupils of cocaine into the united states so in other words in terms of weighing those factors the work took a look at the nature of the charge and weighted more heavily than the other factors and quite honestly what i need you to help me figure because i've been trouble take into consideration as you say the fact that he was the leader well once the supreme court to say there is really a nature the it seems that the district court is free to say that the guideline range doesn't adequately punish the defendant based upon the nature and circumstances of the case which seemingly is what happened here well you arguments it would make any difference the district court view of the role of your client and his judge thompson suggesting court concluded that the would want to charge except make believe agreement that spend made between the parties fifteen to fifty kilograms when really we're talking about nine thousand kilograms it's one thing to keep the trains moving and do some rough justice at the beginning but but now we're asking the judge to close his eyes again and pretend that it really was fifteen to fifty and so i  said that following those is mandatory when it's raised by the government and in this case the defendant simply did not file anything with it and even the maximum extended legal time it wasn't actually extended but if it were you still didn't file anything within that time period that gave either this court or the government notice that he intended to appeal the denial of his seventy two nonetheless based on your honors questions i receive unless you have questions about the he of course had the opportunity to file the motion but number two the administrative directive itself says very clearly and i'm going to quote from it nothing set forth in this directive is intended to confer individual rights  policy consideration simply doesn't have the same force at a situation like this where the defendant received such a beneficial plea agreement as your honour's pointed out and case there's every reason to believe that the this position makes sense yes your honor and i believe not only does it make sense from the record as a whole but it makes sense given that the judge's stated reason he said he was the maximum leader which is a way of expressing this is this defendant was different from all of the other defendants he was the leader he was the organizer he was the one who crew to other people at american airlines who were employed individuals with with jobs to become part of this conspiracy and that conspiracy he was extent the court has this question to deny that motion at the moment that it's filed in the strait of directive doesn't change that in the alternative for this court to find that it is or to disregard the administrative directive we believe in this instance it was harmless and the judge made that clear with his reasoning but i don't know what's the procedure before the magistrate judge did it comply with the administrative directive or or put another way w a lot of those were handled sort of with a team approach right in the usa a defender probation officer it is that how most of most of them were handled correctly over a thousand of them or him that were i think  into that happened in this case what happened in front of the magistrate judge my understanding is it did not happen in this case because of this the motion was denied the magistrate judge did later enter any report and recommendation and my understanding is after so gently the report recommendation of a magistrate judge is sort of a threshold determination and then the and then what happens is the district court has to issue an order you know as just a matter of course the probation office the defense counsel and then after going after the recommendation gets it so that's the piece i'm missing here how did this one end up this is i'm talking about the a magistrate's recommendation went directly to the sort of final determination on how how do the parties know to to get the teen kicked into gear is that when they get their service copy of the report and recommendation were just something happened in the district court that kicks that off after the reporting recommendation the time period i'm focusing on now was the february you know after the report is issued that was sort of summarily rejected by the district court and i'm trying to understand why why didn't something else happen in nonetheless went through the process so that there was a recommendation from the magistrate judge in spite of the fact that it was moot point i think that the point is that it's sort of a separate arm that the magistrate judge is just that i just have a couple other question because we had probably more than any of the other districts we have a host of appeals from the district who are rico on these sentence reduction do now that i've been what the government's position is he's a good you just explain to me while i have you before me how is it that you recommend some be grander than some be denied are policy considerations that are very important to the district of puerto rico and those cases generally we have opposed any further reduction recognizing that the plea agreements are generally tailored to the amount of jail time  guidelines originally in his amended would necessarily take into consideration leadership grow as well as the quantity of the drugs you saw them working backwards when you when you're facing these s you're off this with in conjunction with the defense attorney has already come up with what everyone thinks is the appropriate amount of jail time given the total circumstances surrounding a particular events correction outstanding that's on so how does it do for the man so i mean so how does it differ from the other defendants who are now leaders or they've gone possesses because my sumption is that those same factors will be taken into consideration for all of the defendants who are negotiating please with you that you come up with what you think is the appropriate amount of sentence so i'm i'm i'm could have been far more than that it was several hundred kilos or flight out up to two flights a day several suitcases and the recruitment of other people it just it was a massive massive operation and just last question is it is it fair to say that the policy that you represented to us being the policy of the government here the district court is well aware that representation as to what has been expressed in the district court but i think it's safe to say that the u s attorney's office has been consistent in its recommendations so to the extent that that  policy which i don't believe is a formal or written policy and i apologize i have represented it otherwise but i think the united states has it consistent position it's clear to the district court here yes thank you