i think it goes without saying this point that we're living through unprecedented global health as is and as extraordinary as these circumstances are for everyone in our society depends on it is specially dangerous for my colleagues i'm far less trouble with the coded issues which are all about us and we really were aware of them and and getting to the other car which is  these severe existing conditions but but how is he under the law entitles to get the relief he needed arjun meatball progs of da case does he have it obtaining release and all the start by saying what you define when you argue that he has a high probability of success what does success mean or sugar so we think the purpose of that problem is if prison if he prevails on his argument what he would face at that point is presumably a serious possibility of a retrial about on animals that have affirmed or granted he is really almost always in serious crimes the state takes another run at it and i don't have any reason to assume the state wouldn't take a run at it here and we have somebody who at least the nevada supreme court has indicated faces pretty substantial evidence and indeed doesn't appear deny the fact that he was the person in question he's got a self defense response why should we think the chance of a retrial would matter here i really am jurors will change be acquitted so there's a loss unpacked there st i want to emphasize that even if he does get retried he would still be in silence of bail pending a retrial and he was out on bail under house arrest prejudice how does how is that this decision if it comes along in that fashion how is an unreasonable interpretation of the law on kind of agree with you about what would happen in terms of a in evidence or hearing but i still would get back to judge and question which is assume for a minute that your client gets the hearing the writ is granted going to be a new trial but the evidence is compelling here is so strong what difference does this make in terms of what  a confession is is suppressed for example and so the nd row would be very different we have nothing like that here evidence apparently will be exactly the same thing as the evidence the st time so why should we anticipate a different result you're impacts the th amendment i think that that question nails neal the issue is that they have to show some sort of bias that i shouldn't if the question hasn't been explored as i hear you and i'm not sure really gives a satisfying conclusion at this point in time it and so you're on to that that may be a because i think mcdonnell controls your masako is the controlling federal constitutional law here and as the disapprove even if you look at the work which they're relying on to say it or post verdict they have to rely on something outside of your testimony because the jerk is precluded from testifying about how anything impacted their liberation i this case the defendant didn't have an opportunity to go back and have an evidentiary hearing why and why would that be denied i was just a prejudiced if that is done here so he can show one way or another gets an evidentiary hearing and there's still only a possibility it's not a high probability d it is he's going to have to present that she had an improper motive with respect to her heart affecting her ability are still in the regular updates to the district court so they busy how many how many people how many people are currently been tested or shown to have code where this man is incarcerated that i don't know if you're o into account what we read generally or do we have to get in this case information from the are used to determine the risk to this man and that part of the problem and see that i'm over my time and i get