arrest but they violated the regulation by failing to get a warrant under that circumstance would we have to send it back so that so the issue of prejudice would be addressed you know i think  know who he was or where he was and before that it was the only evidence that they have or their probable cause to arrest him which does not constitute proper probable cause i that's not exactly that's not exactly true it may not be enough but it's not exactly exactly true statement they say we learned before hand that this gentleman had been convicted for the th time i think a  before we went to arrest him we made a record check and we determine that he was an alien in fact he is nobody disputes that he is if you know so getting back to judge as a risk question in your previous argument the circumstance i'm talking about trying to figure out if if it makes sense when the when the agency violates its regs to to call them to account and punish them for trying to figure out what your client get requires that you get a warrant under these circumstances and they had a look and it's not like there was any existence here and they plan to go out to his house and look for him all day made a record check according to them beforehand status was apparent it was under front of our or our jerseys you could ask the judge could consider whether the sister was credible or not credit you could explore further what they knew before they went to arrest of my discussion once we find the regulatory violation and i think there is one and have to send it back for a determination or prejudice because nobody ever addressed that why not then he asked the agency to make a complete seems to me i may be wrong and you can tell me why i am wrong rather clear that this regulation was violated it also seems to be rather clear that nobody addressed whether or not prejudice resulted from or from the from that of my wish of the regulation the rest of the record is really rather unclear just miss questions of mine i think demonstrated and we would be greatly aided by a clear record so why don't we why shouldn't we revamp because it is regulatory violation point out judge once having evidence you're hearing that's fine that questions about consent and what the officers did beforehand are clearly established on this record because it so i presume you're suggesting that they didn't need a warrant and then we're back to judge her words again where the question is whether  proper immigration authorities an opportunity to clear the record i mean i'm i'm wearing my missing something here well you know i think it's important to take a step back and understand that based on everything that happened during these of arrest shall be you taste except when the designated immigration officer has reason to believe that the person is likely to escape before a word can be a day i find new evidence in this record that this mystery chap was likely to escape for want to be a day they took a long time to get to where he was they knew when they went out to get him where he was that he'd been in the country for four years and he was entitled to probably he's never he's been convicted a bunch of times in court you know he showed up for his appearances what evidence is there in this record that would give an immigration officer any reason to believe for arrest and i'm granting you for purposes of this question that you had ample reason to think he was an alien and then you knew he'd been convicted of dui i think four or five times before one of them may have occurred after so maybe it's only for time that he's in the country for a long time yet to prove his wife has given birth at a hospital but aside every all that other stuff surely this is not a case in which there's any reason to think that he's going free before you can arrest decide why don't i mean ideally your honor they would have obtained a warrant in this situation with the facts we have already this is not a perfect situation but it's also not a situation that would warrant so i will state that i got counsel i understand your argument is that we should be putting ourselves in the ocean of law enforcement and i couldn't agree with you more if we had a circumstance where  to ask it to be fair to the government because i want to ask you two to two counsel for a beautician or two it seems to me the reason i'm harping on this warrant issue is that if the agents had gone to a neutral magistra to get a warrant we would have a record about what they knew at the time and where they got it from and it seems to me that this violence what this violation is what makes this case on its facts house and cetera but we don't know that in this case because we don't have a record before a magistrate so i think the government to respond to that and and for the petitioner i ask is not exactly the reason why we ought send it back for further proceedings rather than terminate but your honor i do take that point and i understand that it would have been a much better case here for us as the record  i have i mean i would like to respond briefly to a couple of things that my friend argued st of all you know i would i would submit that the record shows that the records checks performed was