I did. Their argument was that due process was handled in the preceding two trials and due process should be denied because X and Y, but to the point that a rel

I did. Their argument was that due process was handled in the preceding two trials and due process should be denied because X and Y, but to the point that a relevant case was misapplied (which should result in appeal), they basically say "umm... that was case specific and yada yada yada we're right".