these jury correctly returned guilty verdicts on all counts the district court overturned three of those count one with respect to white and two with respect to howard and that will error with the court's permission i'd like to crocus my opening remarks on the government's affirmative appeal st as to white the district court erred by finding that m t g was not an enterprise at trial there was more than sufficient evidence that took place during a gang fight between other n g s and killed were members after the athol howard sent messages on social took the media to another ending june member devon white didn't that he wanted to retaliate  personal interest in going after this one individual here are there was undoubtedly a personal component of what did what to defend and what how we get here but this court has been clear that there can be personal aspect of this it can be one aspect of it as long as maintaining or increasing his position in the gang is also part of that and i would point the court here to a precedent so i'm not sure that the court has to answer this question that question here in light of what we know about the way in which howard retaliated and engaged in this act of violence he didn't go alone he took  statements at the time about the defendant wanting to retaliate again down the block individuals but you see him three years later also acting with this fellow and the gym member to to commit this crime so so while perhaps it is is possible on some set of facts that something that started as a gang rivalry could turn personal those are not the facts here and and most importantly this court analysis and  this crime the jury was instructed that he doesn't need to be sole your sole purpose the jury was instructed properly on what it needed to find the jury was allowed to choose between and it did that in finding the defendant guilty on that count and and and that's because the evidence that we put forth at trial of the m t g of what was expected of n b g members in connection with this  kill brought the testimony of the two cooperating witnesses joey cohen and he stated about the countless acts of violence committed by n b g members against kill brooke members in a sense a ping howard he did not there was no testimony that he became a big gun after committing the shooting in two thousand and fourteen but but i don't think that that makes the prove any less efficient particularly because you know what what the shoots a fourteen year old kid thinking he's a he's a critical part of this broader blood crip rivalry and the question you know i think he argued it could increase his status because no one would think that killing a fourteen year old accidently would do that but the evidence at trial particularly on a mission see review where again the question is could any rational juror found that this enterprise existed and and again you know for the reasons or in our brief and as i've explained today we think the evidence here w knowingly agreed to participate in it congress intended enterprise to be more than just unconnected group of people who may have committed crimes and the government failed to prove such here for similar reasons the court should have found that the government failed to prove the just your honor i believe the case to say that this group have to be coordinated they have to be acting together to pursue a common goal i think that's what the case would say doesn't necessarily have to have any particular structure or hierarchy but it does have to have a continual need purpose and that simply wasn't present here correct but here there was no there was insufficient evidence to show that it was gang related the evidence all suggest that it's personal that bank is the same principle as parent  appeal was whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for a murder in aid of a narcotics operation quite analogous to what we have here it may in fact even have been a rico case but i thought and the argument to the jury below had been it was a personal be removed from the conviction because the jury was properly a motive to increase one's standing in the conspiracy that's not present here there wasn't evidence that white shootings were in to gain status in n b g these were entirely personal shooting retaliation after he had been the victim of an assault not just on one occasion but on prior occasions nor was there any evidence presented by the government that  him and or that his status was in fact elevated after the shooting the evidence at this trial showed that mr howard had been in this gang for approximately ten years and mostly that evidence comes from his bluster and messages he actually never participated in any act of violence in retaliation or for any of that matter against members of killed he had been a victim  it but again your honor there was no dissemination of that fact afterwards they even discuss it he didn't inform other members of it he did nothing in order to disseminate the information orders for o ther members to conclude that he had gone back to him and absent that fact absent his own personal behavior and unwillingness to discuss the shooting inform other members of the shooting take credit for the shooting or use the shooting to i'm going to date other individuals i think our fact that the court considered here we're making a determination that there was insufficient evidence presented by the government that  howard did anything to try to enhance its position in the gang the way one would enhance your position again according to using an example from farmer would be by exploiting the activity done informing other himself was the victim of and concentrated his retaliation critically on daniel then the only logical draw here is that this was personal in nature g along with members of two group were actively engaging in creasing violence in the neighborhood and it was for their old personal business reasons as they concluded that the violence increased police presence in the neighborhood which significantly decreased their prospects from drug dealing and as a result of that the finding of this shooting is also evidence of how  point the court to a few additional points in the record that further support the government's position which the jury found that the shooting was in part motivated by by him and desire to maintain or  the gang i do want to correct be the claim that this shooting was the only thing that how where did in connection with fellow and b g members be that the government cooperating witness testified at trial to another incident in two thousand and seven when he along with howard and several other n b g members went down to mitchell's a ride housing project with the intention of shooting and howard was present for that and that on page forty three  for reasons other than white participation and teaching it doesn't matter that the victims will coble members that's not control was controlling is why he committed the offense and as the district court found none of these offenses were committed to increase  narcotics conspiracy even when he himself was the victim of assault and robbery by members of killed and as a result of that i submit to the court that it cannot credibly be argued that