did receive in this case aniline and blakely and i also asked permission the corporate supplemental briefing as my understanding i did that by motion that that motion not been ruled on and i'm prepared to discuss family in blakely this morning you've got a few  determination of any additional fact other than the facts that been stipulated to by the defendant in her plea agreement therefore in this case the issue involved is the application mother judge of fact appeal waiver my argument is the government did breach the very recently because you have to understand the government's obligation under their agreement or their stipulation is the facts and that my two minutes but they're sticking like in fact in stipulation  in the guidelines intersections to be one point for which there is one the government intrusion into place in the guidelines the government has a duty to come forward in support of the stipulation that's in sixty one point four the defendant's reasonable r i am familiar with that this was handled by a special assistant united states attorney from my office and i am a former special assistant so i sort of look after the matters involving the military so i knew this was going on at the time and i and i did have a hand in the there's the united states probation office recommended and the district court ultimately found that the injury to the victim was somewhat more serious than the parties that stipulated to it's a simple as that the district court went on an independent fact finding venture with the help of united states probation and it came up with an offense level that was higher because they found the enhanced due to the injury was more significant  and what goes on and what we're looking at with this appellate weaver is that she she weaves the rights to challenge the manner in which the sentence is determined and only reserve that right with regard to what we've been talking about in a court departure from the political guideline range is moved but it is not a departure which after that after you find its likeable guy in line range of departure is going above and beyond for some reason that's not articulated in the guidelines so one is an enhancement and one is that a departure that's correct correct and it's the government's position with some of these paragraphs that highlighted in our response brief paragraph eleven paragraph eighteen it talks about although there are factual stipulations although there are stipulations telephone conversation or an emergency room record running where is there any suggestion that the injury is permanent court on the telephone about the length of the scars the width of the scars and the actual fact that this this conversation now is taking place so many months after the incident and she still has the scar she talks about them being ja them about them being embarrassing i think it's the actual time where the district court is taking telephone testimony in relation to when the incident took place those many months past and the fact that she still has a significant scars in different areas of her through opportunity to go during the two days to clean more evidence such as medical records photos and stature that might be presented nothing was presented the only thing that happened was they called her up on the phone and she says she's got the scars  what indicates reliability is the court's finding she's there she's there to assess the credibility when she's talking on that day page ninety six the record actually has the district court coming out and saying i find the victim's testimony truthful actually makes a credibility finding  understanding as what the government's obligation was and this plea agreement which induced earlier this plea would be that the government would comply with the dictates of syncing guideline section six b one point four and that requires the government to that requires a stipulation set forth with meaningful specificity with meaningful specificity the reasons why the sensing range resulting from the proposed agreement is appropriate that wasn't done here and wasn't done at least  except to the extent that a party may be privileged not to disclose certain information stipulation shall one set forth the relevant facts and circumstances of the actual offense conduct and offender characteristics to say maybe extent that a party may be privileged not to disclose certain information stipulation shall one set forth the relevant facts and circumstances of the actual  conduct an offender characteristics to not contain misleading facts and three set forth with meaningful specificity the reasons why the sentencing range resulting from the proposed agreement is appropriate information when you give a court judge i don't know what the discovery was in the case what the what the basis of the stipulation was and nobody knows because the government didn't presented the senate so they have these pictures that show pretty terrible injuries just molly's comment that she was visiting a psychologist but you know i've argued i've tried to point out in detail in my brief the inconsistency is in the victim's statement and i think the claim of the need for five hundred thousand dollars for plastic surgery  yeah your number one we'll try this again thank you for a forty meter reader read the brief and ross that's exactly the direction i was headed in and one of the things that i wanted to point out that i think is selling into this case that that was enough to say sufficiently in the briefs is while it's not  explored when exactly in the trial record when exactly my client received the transcripts that contain the information there's a new trial was based on the docket it page thirty three excerpts of record doesn't keep it it wasn't returned to him until