onus shows that during at some point during the drive she had said that she wanted she needed some heroin because she had some physical pains and that her boyfriend  some heroin because of his shoulder pain my client drove out to a location as a judge john as the evidence showed any stronger than he the drug dealer money and receive the drugs from and whether or not he was sufficient to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt the fact that the trial charge and a sentence in hearing of the codefendant in stuck with enough evidence based upon w trial that she got out of the car when across the street to a white castle while the defendant went in met this drug dealer he knew it and had called me musically but fourteen grams of heroin when i return to the vehicle she got back in the vehicle he kept three grams of heroin that she admitted she promised to him and gave the other eleven and any person's death is caused by the injection inhalation absorption or in just of any amount of that controlled substance him there would be any doubt that this defendant livered heroin he specifically drove to a place called a drug dealer bought the heroin and took it back to these people this is  it doesn't matter how many times this is or you're suggesting it's accountability because this you know i'm not i'm saying he did he don't live he went to the drug dealer and he bought it he took possession of it he went to the motor me she did she found him guilty she found him guilty and that's a little bit different from some of the cases i think in the radia there was the defendant when he said stated and of the drugs so can can you discuss by driving by contacting the drug dealer by purchasing the drugs by driving the drugs and back to the victim's residence the fact that he's not the one who got out of the the evidence of this bench trial is this defendant was in possession of it first he called the dealer he met the dealer he paid the dealer he took the drugs i guess that's not the only simultaneous possession by these two individuals can both of them be found to have been made the delivery ye i would think when he dropped her off and she excellent heart would let in grams of it but he still was in possession of three so technically speaking out of the you distinguish the facts and there's conflict in the end well if i've got your attention then this is a bit more of what i'm saying is that he rushes there was enough conflicting evidence to create a reasonable doubt ok and then you go on in the very last hour last sentence you say the court put it down the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable the answer is yes and they need to understand what that cause you to i'm getting tired of listening to myself about you know the defendant's involvement in this case the testimony was that machine berger called him i need a ride to go get some hair and you know me out you got out in the car went to he called the drug dealer midge meet the drug dealer bought the dough from the drug dealer went back to the car and then drove back with machine berger to mystic since h why now you know i think i felt that that was pretty unnecessary to do that i mean i have never seen a case decided on whether or not there was a reasonable doubt of an defended bill that was based on anything other than the evidence introduced to this trial of it so that that makes our job just a little more you know i can apologize for that i should think that with you would be evidence that this how to get around that if they possess something together and she is the physical transfer of that possession to another little this i'm just getting you know that you have to actually put it in his hand to be this so all the liver