however despite the firing nature of where heard in this case it didn't amount to a home invasion because the state failed to prove the on authorize injury element beyond a reasonable doubt and there's three reasons for that first  and then the question becomes who was that an exit in reentry these death these terms aren't defined by statute but common usage and common understanding would say  cases we're just relying on again the common usage of those terms so soon as this event that sort of this is the second or the second issue is that out of the first one regarding the limited authority doctrine can actually be dispensed with appeal it can be considered and in if it could be considered there's no evidence there's certainly no evidence beyond reasonable doubt of criminal intent at the time of injury mr ramsey went in there because he thought   we're doing with a smaller structure there there is more privacy in the victim we have more for you only that space on foot even even so i think in your hypothetical continues to make these choices what about what the what the court needs to do and what the court didn't do it here is to make an inquiry into the reasons for the defendant's motion and that's really going to start and so one thing wager a trial is there is nothing to do that day and in fact if you look at some of the double jeopardy cases jurisdiction or it should be jeopardy doesn't attach to better i'll tell the first witness is called so this trial hasn't started yet he didn't say anything the day before but we don't know what's causing him to make this this complaint at the time that the judge didn't ask him why you are happy with your public defender name or the public defender knew the name but there still wasn't an actual appearance yes  time to look for another truth but you just do it if we don't know exactly what the attorney what the defendant was doing it wasn't doing well he didn't bring in a new attorney let's put it that way even expressing his concern that he wants his own attorney wants knives  are exactly right this case it is set for trial at least five times before it actually went to trial as early as january twenty eighth two thousand and fourteen the trial actually commenced on august twenty fifth two thousand and  continue to represent the defendant in til the time of trial try to press chin was set more than three months before the actual trial date and between the time it was set in may of twenty fifteen and the time that the trial began or was scheduled to begin for jury trial on august twenty fourth there were two interim dates for pretrial proceedings and things of that nature at no time did defendant ask for a new i don't know off the top of my head i do know i can recall at least one at least one time and that is apart from that july twenty fourth twenty fourteen date where when mr gibson p s i do recall at least one time maybe apologize i don't know the specific number of the point and i'm going to end now the question i'm asking does relate to that he's looked for an attorney before he has to appear at least on one occasion when he heard from defense counsel who advocated for the defendant in order for a motion to continue and there is no indication the record the defense counsel's advocacy was in direct conflict or conflict of interest with the defendant and i think  trial court's statements and the interaction between defense counsel and the state and the court alas the trial court to make that conscious decision to determine the facts necessary to determine whether or not it was going to grant the throughout the course of the proceedings in addition to what was told to the court during the motion asking for the motion to continue at the court made a conscious decision and determined that there was not sufficient evidence to bench they started the next day only because there was planning on both sides in order to which witnesses to call and if there are no other questions on choice of coun don't like to specifically addressed the argument that the defendant reached his hand out the back door to obtain these gardening tools there is nothing in the record about reaching your hand out the back the victim is able to delete approximately twenty numbers from his phone to try to dial nine one one week the badger walk back from the bedroom into the kitchen and right before did anyone ever say ask him how much the area that we're talking about is that the victim that you can issue as to whether or not it's part of the dwelling here and in here in fact there is a number of issues a number of statements that mr stanley could not use the eleventh hour he i mean that sounds like he's making that finding based upon the record and his experience in this case so what more does he need they don't have to have a disagreement they don't their head doesn't have to be a conflict