we living in his apartment detective or officer branch at the time was a police officer and was looking for a burglar due to some text messages that were sent to him from a confidential informant who had been admitted during the special hearing that he had been convicted for lines of the police at some points he then went to one apartment three o eight and found nothing they knocked on the door at the berkeley wasn't happening and then once again text message his confidential informant and so he along with his fellow officer no burglary was happening obviously there was no break in and so at that point detective branch asks for identification from mr probably tomorrow and then ask him for more identification until he goes inside as well as those charges look and i'm a little confused as to when you're arguing the unlawful detention occurred and i grabbed it was responsible or a detective branch at that time had asked for the mexican passport and took a picture of the mexican passport and i believe at that point he had already seen the nevada driver's license so essentially he was digging for identification and once he got the mexican passport that through the rest of the conversation with the ice officer he was standing in the hall as i understand it and your client was after he took a picture of the passport to border patrol border patrol and she hated the conversation with detective branch to detain him and at that point he erected  right so where is the arrest i don't understand the physical arrest here well he reached in and then arrested my client he was asked to detain mr mr problem our own so he reached in and and a private text program associated with the number and when we tried retrieving those those text messages he admitted in court that the number had been destroyed all the text messages had been destroyed  and unfortunately we could not get the communication between those two individuals the confidential informant and detective branch there wasn't a lot of legal research in terms of trying to find text messages between confidential informants and officers but the judge will an heiress in the district of new jersey had made mention that if you can find all of the text messages and you can't use any of the text messages essentially is the opinion and that was between an f b i agent and a and his confidential informant and this is the whole beginnings to what had happened to my client essentially this officer is going from floor to floor looking for burglary that didn't happen and then ensue eventually ends up at my client's front door this is kind of what precipitated the issue here that point let me ask you kind of a threshold issue which is i believe you have to show good cause for not raising a couple of these issues pretrial and timely rule twelve what do you you counsel's and defense counsels and then i was appointed afterwards and the communication between him and i were a little bit more fluid and unfortunately  we ended up in a position where the case was continued out until january th two thousand and twenty where we eventually had trial so essentially my client had been detained this entire time because  they immigration warrant on him after his criminal case in these cases generally individuals who have been arrested for reentry plead guilty and then they're shipped into minneapolis for immigration proceedings and then deported back to their home countr but as to my client donald very well i tell you hear you saying that that is the good cause for being in the motions is that what you're saying the change of coun responded to a late night report of suspicious activity involving quote two black males walking around and quote and encountered rodriguez was gone and another man watching in the area mike my client was walking out in the street  here initially my client was not on the streets there was no search for a person who had reported some kind of suspicious activity all of these issues were precipitated by these text messages back and forth which we do not have this is a communication that generally when i receive discovery is added is this text message is admissible i don't know is it discover o officer's negligence in preserving evidence or potential evidence in this issue in this case the issue is that they were not preserved they weren't handed over to defense counsel with this quote unquote confidential informant we never received his name nor his as i understand the law regardless of whether it's brady or suppression hearing her any kind of hearing you have to show what the kind of was and that's kind of important materiality and and what it is don't you have that burden here griping about not getting it because you're on i think it's a huge question of how the office the text messages and discovery should result in what a new trial no trial dismissal punishment of the prosecutor where as the district court given it given any alert you have met for oh yes your honor and i'd like to correct myself yes he was in the hallway i am confusing his story with the story of the agent the agent testified to that fact there was another individual who was in the apartment they ended up arresting him as well the  the government opposes many different arguments what i'd like to address at least is in any event in the review district court financial factual determinations pre clearance legal conclusions kno i understand and in trial that that that might have been an issue an edible would like the the judge i mean i would like the court to hold merit over procedure i believe my time is ended and thank you very much