is your client the united states says he has your honor what is the relief you're asking for in this room we're asking to vacate the judgment knows that's because your client is not incarcerated right that's correct so you have to show some prejudices or it's not quite correct correct what is it prejudice if this court does not grant that writ well to begin with your honor essentially tried to maintain his innocence of the original manufacturer riches and secondly he believes that he pled guilty to something what what is he worried about show that they were actually born here that might be an issue or if they lie to become naturalized is he a naturalized citizen he is a naturalized citizen is there any claim of any misconduct with respect to obtaining the legal permanent residence was based on fraud or but that's got nothing to do with these charges right that is correct ok so he might he might have a concern but it's not because of this case it's not because of this prosecution he's got to lose this isn't shipped as a result of anything related to this prosecution is it as of today no you're ok all right so that goes gets back to judge murphy's question petitions let me ask a question does that make a difference that he's a lawyer with respect to your claims that is counsel didn't explain things good enough time well i would say yes it does because a lot of this has to do with immigration law and immigration law is extremely complex and so in a sense the trial lawyer knew the difference between what is it being on c b c application and because he's a lawyer that it makes any difference the lawyer had to do his own counsel had to explain it to him just as though they would someone who was not sophisticated in the law it didn't it didn't like decrease his coun duty as far as how much they had to say it's the same as if it was an educated person with no with no training in the law with his every i would say yes ok only kind of these only because of the unique complex survive when you wait you may be right i'm just i'm just testing it out let me let me ask you another question about the changing of the information how did that how did that hurt him i mean so he pleads guilty he gets sentenced he serves a sentence somewhere in the background here we have an amendment of the information that he claims was  improper he didn't get any additional time it's not like he's been sentenced another time on it or anything like that and he's admitted to the conduct that was the basis of the crime how has he has he been har well he's been harmed because essentially was this a material misrepresentation his lawyer convinced him to take the deal this is the material misrepresentation i would say so his wife was not eighteen years of age she was two or three years younger so he might have died it would have made a difference if they would have presented this information to the u s embassy overseas or to the immigration officer in new york city i think it i the united states supreme court in june of two thousand and eighteen the issue about what is a material misrepresentation has come to the fore i think that's what ignited and sparked this whole thing in mr mil mind maybe there's something new here my misrepresentation wasn't material my defense lawyer should have not taken this deal he should've gotten something else thirdly right i mean but then that it's the court i mean the tenth circuit and they're denying the certificate of appeal ability they've educated mr miles to say this was a substantial the variance between the february two thousand and two affidavit of support versus the july two thousand and one wife they said that but we're not going to listen to your claim because you have this appellate waiver and it was the u s attorney that educated mr m waiver doesn't apply if the judge exceeds the guidelines and the judge gave him five years rather than the zero to six months recommended guidelines so he's here he's smart enough to learn from what you're sweden and if he has united states of this ship he cannot be an alien nation in that correct yes or other then why is this asserted in here that he was an alien nation al we have a petition here that contains see this is his second quorum notice petitions yes correct there's a doctrine called abuse of the record and it seems to me tell me where i'm wrong that every claim you're making now has either been previously resolved in a rout sitting or it could have been raised in a previous writ proceeding form notice or twenty to fifty five if that's the case then this case is you can't get any relief because it's abuse of the rich are not raising anything that you couldn't have raised before or didn't raise before what could he raise here that he couldn't have  inconsequential mistake you don't think we decided that that in a prior appeal in this court we stated that it's clear from the pleadings from the plea agreement and from his statements that he knew exactly what he was pleading to there might there was might have been a mistake about the date in the indictment that's that mind of giving a statute of limitation defense but that was waived with the plea that he knew precisely what he was pleading to he knew which document was allegedly falsified so that's already been resolved i don't see how you can say he didn't didn't know he by be challenging that again well we said that an opinion yes you're yes yes so that's resolved it's abuse of a writ to bring it again absent some extraordinary circumstance which is not present here so what else could he so that claim would disappear for the reasons judge murphy has been pursuing but even if it was available even if he weren't a citizen he he could raise that claim in an earlier but other than that i would say that i see my time is almost here thank you thank you the second option docking the government pursued earlier would be to handle this through a motion to import any other summary for evidence or something along those lines i understand why the court might be reluctant to do that because there would be no way