Hey, this is an English text. I want you to translate it into the Tunisian dialect. Please follow these steps:
1. Translate step by step and highlight differences between Tunisian dialect and Modern Standard Arabic.
2. Highlight sections you are confident translating into the Tunisian dialect.
Translate this text into the Tunisian dialect, focusing on capturing the essence of the language nuances:

803 F.2d 1103 Barney Earl CRUTCHFIELD, Petitioner-Appellee,v.Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Jim Smith, Respondents-Appellants. No. 84-3508. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Nov. 10, 1986. Thomas H. Bateman, III, Dept. of Legal Affairs, Tallahassee, Fla., for respondents-appellants. Gwendolyn Spivey, Tallahassee, Fla., for petitioner-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. Before RONEY, Chief Judge, and GODBOLD, TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, VANCE, KRAVITCH, JOHNSON, HATCHETT, ANDERSON, CLARK and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. HATCHETT, Circuit Judge: 1 In this case, the en banc court decides the extent to which a trial court may instruct a criminal defendant not to confer with counsel during a recess which occurs during the defendant's testimony. 2 During Barney Earl Crutchfield's trial for armed robbery with a deadly weapon, the Florida trial judge instructed Crutchfield's counsel not to talk with him about his testimony: 3 THE COURT: All right. We're going to take a little break, Ladies and Gentlemen. We've been at it a little bit. And I see there's a sigh of relief on some faces? Over here. Do not discuss this case, please, while you're in the jury room. All right. 4 [WHEREUPON, THE JURY WAS REMOVED FROM THE JURY BOX.] 5 THE COURT: All right. Gentlemen, in view of the fact that this is going to be a very brief break, I direct that the lawyers for Mr. Crutchfield not to discuss his testimony with him during the course of this break. 6 After receiving this instruction, Crutchfield's counsel did not object, move for a mistrial, or ask to discuss with him non-testimonial aspects of the case. Crutchfield, who was on the witness stand at the time of the admonition, contends that this admonition constituted the first violation of his right to the assistance of counsel. 7 The length of the recess, which occurred near the end of Crutchfield's direct examination, is in dispute. The government contends that it was brief and routine. Crutchfield contends that it extended into a two-hour lunch break. Because of the manner in which we resolve the issue, the length of the recess is rendered unimportant. 8 After the recess direct examination continued for a short period of time. During cross-examination, Crutchfield made statements which indicated that he had no reason to rob or steal because his father supplied his financial needs.1 After soliciting this testimony, the trial court sent the jury out of the courtroom and the prosecutor sought permission to impeach Crutchfield through presentation of evidence that he had been convicted for burglary five years before. Holding that Crutchfield "opened the door" for this impeachment evidence, the trial court granted the prosecutor permission to impeach Crutchfield using the prior conviction evidence. Crutchfield, apparently realizing that the impeaching evidence would be presented to the jury, asked the court to speak with his counsel. 9 THE COURT: All right. Bring the jury in. Son, don't direct any statements to me. If you have anything, you speak to your lawyer. 10 CRUTCHFIELD: Can--can I speak with him?