alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered April 7, 2020 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00329-CV 

IN RE OMAR H. HENRY, Relator 

Original Proceeding from the 416th Judicial District Court 

Collin County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 416-56857-2018 

ORDER 

Before Justices Myers, Molberg, and Evans 

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s March 9, 2020 

petition for writ of habeas corpus. 

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

 JUSTICE
### Part B—Regulation of Swap Markets
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0473

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

PHILIP BRYSON GRIMSHAW,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including June 30, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 25 2023

05/25/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0473
#### § 311.30 Livestock suffocated and hogs scalded alive.

All livestock which have been suffocated in any way and hogs which have entered the scalding vat alive shall be condemned.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael Williams, Also Known as Cecil Hunt, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 681]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered December 18, 2002, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree (two counts), burglary in the first degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, his motion pursuant *857to CPL 330.30 (1) in which he claims a violation of *Brady v Maryland*(373 US 83 [1963]) was properly denied by the trial court (see *People v Brown,*67 NY2d 555, 559 [1986]; *People v Bailey,*275 AD2d 663 [2000]). To the extent the defendant’s claim is based on a post-verdict investigation, it is dehors the record and therefore is not reviewable on direct appeal (see *People v Spirles,*294 AD2d 810 [2002]; *People v Bailey, supra).*

We reject the defendant’s contention that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of an accomplice (see CPL 60.22). “[T]he testimony from the accomplice witness was sufficiently corroborated by evidence from . . . independent source [s] tending to connect the defendant with the crime in such a way that the jury may be reasonably satisfied that the accomplice [was] telling the truth” *(People v Nylander,*21 AD3d 500, 501 [2005] [citations and internal quotation marks omitted]; *see People v Daniels,*37 NY2d 624, 629-630 [1975]). Miller, J.P., Ritter, Spolzino and Dillon, JJ., concur.
#### Pendleton and another *vs.*Woodhouse and wife.

To a bill by a trustee of a married woman, calling in question the act of her husband in disposing of as his own, property of which the wife claims to be the equitable owner, the husband is a necessary party.

On bill and demurrer.

*Mr. Osear Keene,*for the demurrer.

*Mr. A. Duteher,*contra.

The Chancellor.

The bill is filed by George F. Pendleton, as trustee, and Harriet M. Treat, as *cestui que trust,*to compel a conveyance by Sylvester L. Woodhouse and wife, of certain land in Somerset, to the trustee. Woodhouse and wife demur, on the ground that Joseph Treat, the husband of the *cestui que trust,*is not a party to the suit. That in a suit by a wife in reference to her separate estate the husband is a necessary party is not questioned, but it is insisted that this rule does not apply where the suit is brought by a trustee. It appears by the bill that the complainant, Pendleton, being the holder of the legal title to the property, made and delivered a deed of conveyance for it to Joseph Treat, to the end, as is alleged, *348that he should insert iii it in a blank left for the purpose, the name of some person as grantee, and thus the trustee be changed. The bill alleges that Treat, abusing the confidence thus imposed in him, filled the blank with the name of Mrs. Woodhouse, and delivered the deed to her for a valuable consideration received by him to his own use. The complainants base their claim to relief on the allegation, that the property was the separate estate of Mrs. Treat. The relief sought is in" direct opposition to the interest of her husband. The bill called into question his acts in treating as his own, property, the title to which was not in his wife, but of which she claims to have been the equitable owner. He is a necessary party to the suit.

The demurrer is sustained.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 06-2347

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * Western District of Missouri. * Randy Dabney, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: June 7, 2007 Filed: December 1, 2008

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Randy Dabney challenges the district court’s determination that his prior Missouri conviction for stealing a truck is a “violent felony” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). We review de novo the district court’s determination that a prior conviction is a qualifying “violent felony.” See United States v. Davidson , 527 F.3d 703, 707 (8th Cir. 2008).
While this case was pending on appeal, th e United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Begay v. United States , 128 S. Ct. 1581, 1583, 1585-86 (2008) (to be “violent felony” under § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii), cr ime must be “roughly similar, in kind as well as in degree of risk posed,” to examples listed in statute; listed crimes all-2- typically involve purposeful, violent, and aggressive conduct). Following Begay , we re-examined whether auto theft should be considered a “crime of violence.” See United States v. Williams , 537 F.3d 969, 971, 973-76 (8th Cir. 2008) (this court has never recognized distinction between “cri me of violence” and “violent felony”; analyzing Missouri auto-theft law in light of Begay ). After noting that the relevant Missouri statute sets forth three distinct offe nses (auto theft without consent, auto theft by deceit, and auto theft by coercion), seeMo. Rev. Stat. § 570.030, we concluded that only auto theft by coercion satisfied Begay ’s requirements and qualified as a “crime of violence,” see Williams , 537 F.3d at 973-976. Therefore, Dabney’s prior conviction for stealing a truck is a “violent felony” only if he committed the offense of auto theft by coercion.
In determining whether Dabney committe d auto theft by coercion, our inquiry is restricted to examining a “limited universe of judicial documents.” See United States v. Reliford , 471 F.3d 913, 916 (8th Cir. 2006) (w hen offense is eligible for “violent felony” classification but state cr iminal statute is over-inclusive--that is, elements of offense also encompass conduct that does not constitute “violent felony”- -court must consider facts underlying convi ction; inquiry is conducted by examining limited universe of judicial documents), cert. denied , 127 S. Ct. 2248 (2007); see also Shepard v. United States , 544 U.S. 13, 26 (2005) (inquiry is limited to terms of charging document, terms of plea agreemen t or transcript of colloquy, or some comparable judicial recordof this information).
Because we cannot determine from the present record whether Dabney committed auto theft by coercion, wevacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. See Williams , 537 F.3d at 973 (instructing district court, after considering materials permissible under Shepard , to determine which auto-theft offense appellant committed).

______________________________
§ 3.26 Facilities, indoor. ( a ) *Heating.* Indoor housing facilities for guinea pigs or hamsters shall be sufficiently heated when necessary to protect the animals from the cold, and to provide for their health and comfort. The ambient temperature shall not be allowed to fall below 60 °F. nor to exceed 85 °F.
( b ) *Ventilation.* Indoor housing facilities for guinea pigs or hamsters shall be adequately ventilated to provide for the health and comfort of the animals at all times. Such facilities shall be provided with fresh air either by means of windows, doors, vents, or air conditioning, and shall be ventilated so as to minimize drafts, odors, and moisture condensation. The ambient temperature shall not be allowed to rise above 85 °F.
( c ) *Lighting.* Indoor housing facilities for guinea pigs or hamsters shall have ample light, by natural or artificial means, or both, of good quality and well distributed. Such lighting shall provide uniformly distributed illumination of sufficient light intensity to permit routine inspection and cleaning during the entire working period. Primary enclosures shall be so placed as to protect the guinea pigs or hamsters from excessive illumination.
( d ) *Interior surfaces.* The interior building surfaces of indoor housing facilities shall be constructed and maintained so that they are substantially impervious to moisture and may be readily sanitized.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         165,763
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  755,507
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    137,158
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,193,935
<PP&E>                                         824,760
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,782,876
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          726,375
<BONDS>                                        569,977
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        53,692
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,449,246
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,782,876
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,582,790
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,788,729
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               546,599
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,919
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                209,442
<INCOME-TAX>                                    83,777
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            125,665
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   125,665
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.30
        

</TABLE>
# C_2011282EN.01002101.xml

| 24.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/21

---

Order of the General Court of 18 July 2011 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case T-450/10 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Reasonable period of time within which to bring a damages claim - Lateness - Appeal partly manifestly inadmissible and partly manifestly unfounded)

2011/C 282/42

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, agents, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (First Chamber) of 9 July 2010 in Case F-91/09 Marcuccio v Commission, not yet published in the ECR, and seeking to annul that order.

Marcuccio

Commission

Operative part of the order:

Operative part of the order:

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Luigi Marcuccio is to bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Luigi Marcuccio is to bear his own costs and those incurred by the European Commission in the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 317, 20.11.2010.

1

---
| ****
**Just for Kidz**

****

**Adults Only**

**Media**
****
 

**Teachers**
**Resources********Business Buzz**
w

*Revised:                     04/02/2003* |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 57 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 57

To amend the National Trails System Act to provide for the study of the 
                     Pike National Historic Trail.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 8, 2019

Mr. Bennet (for himself and Mr. Gardner) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the National Trails System Act to provide for the study of the 
                     Pike National Historic Trail.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Pike National Historic Trail Study 
Act''.

SEC. 2. PIKE NATIONAL HISTORIC TRAIL STUDY.

    Section 5(c) of the National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 1244(c)) 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(46) Pike national historic trail.--The Pike National 
        Historic Trail, a series of routes extending approximately 
        3,664 miles, which follows the route taken by Lt. Zebulon 
        Montgomery Pike during the 1806-1807 Pike expedition that began 
        in Fort Bellefontaine, Missouri, extended through portions of 
        the States of Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, New Mexico, and 
        Texas, and ended in Natchitoches, Louisiana.''.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40507 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JULIAN FELIPE GONZALEZ OLIVARES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:01-CR-208-1

-------------------- February 20, 2003 Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Julian Felipe Gonzalez Olivares (“Olivares”) appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for being an alien unlawfully found in the United States after deportation. 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He argues that his prior marijuana-possession conviction was not an aggravated felony for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C)(2001). Olivares’s challenge to the adjustment of his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C)(2001) is without merit. See United States v. Caicedo-Cuero , 312 F.3d 697, 706-11 (5th Cir. 2002).
AFFIRMED.
### §1676. Enforcement by Secretary of Labor

The Secretary of Labor, acting through the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor, shall enforce the provisions of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title III, §306, May 29, 1968, 82 Stat. 164.)
#### § 590.426 Retention.

Retention tags or other devices and methods as may be approved by the Administrator shall be used for the identification and control of products which are not in compliance with the regulations or are held for further examination, and any equipment, utensils, rooms or compartments which are found to be unclean or otherwise in violation of the regulations. No product, equipment, utensil, room, or compartment shall be released for use until it has been made acceptable. Such identification shall not be removed by anyone other than an inspector.
#### § 590.340 Who must perform the appeal inspection or decision review.

An appeal inspection or review of inspection program personnel's decisions, as requested in § 590.310, must be performed by inspection program personnel of FSIS other than the one who made the initial decision.

[85 FR 68676, Oct. 29, 2020]
#### § 147.45 Official delegates.

Each cooperating State shall be entitled to one official delegate for each of the programs prescribed in parts 145 and 146 of this subchapter in which it has one or more participants at the time of the Conference. The official delegates shall be elected by a representative group of participating industry members and be certified by the Official State Agency. It is recommended but not required that the official delegates be Plan participants. Individuals may be allowed to be an official delegate or alternate delegate for up to three States in which that delegate has flocks or is a plan participant with acknowledgement and approval of the Official State Agencies. Each official delegate shall endeavor to obtain, prior to the Conference, the recommendations of industry members of their State with respect to each proposed change.

[85 FR 62572, Oct. 5, 2020]
#### § 311.6 Diamond-skin disease.

Carcasses of hogs affected with diamond-skin disease when localized and not associated with systemic change may be passed for human food after removal and condemnation of the affected parts, provided such carcasses are otherwise healthy.
### **CHAPTER 3—COMPOSITION AND ORGANIZATION**

Sec.
301.
Grades and ratings.
302.
Commandant; appointment.
303.
Retirement of Commandant or Vice Commandant.
304.
Vice Commandant; appointment.
305.
Vice admirals.
306.
Retirement.
307.
Vice admirals and admiral, continuity of grade.
308.
Chief Acquisition Officer.
309.
Office of the Coast Guard Reserve; Director.
310.
Chief of Staff to President: appointment.
311.
Captains of the port.
312.
Prevention and response workforces.
313.
Centers of expertise for Coast Guard prevention and response.
314.
Marine industry training program.
315.
Training for congressional affairs personnel.
316.
National Coast Guard Museum.
317.
United States Coast Guard Band; composition; director.
318.
Environmental Compliance and Restoration Program.
319.
Unmanned system program and autonomous control and computer vision technology project.
320.
Coast Guard Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps.
321.
Congressional affairs; Director.
322.
Redistricting notification requirement.
323.
Western Alaska Oil Spill Planning Criteria Program.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior analysis for chapter 3 "COMPOSITION AND ORGANIZATION" consisted of items 41 "Grades and ratings", 41a "Active duty promotion list", 42 "Number and distribution of commissioned officers on active duty promotion list", 44 "Commandant; appointment", 46 "Retirement of Commandant or Vice Commandant", 47 "Vice Commandant; appointment", 50 "Vice admirals", 51 "Retirement", 52 "Vice admirals and admiral, continuity of grade", 53 "Office of the Coast Guard Reserve; Director", 54 "Chief of Staff to President: appointment", 56 "Chief Acquisition Officer", 57 "Prevention and response workforces", 58 "Centers of expertise for Coast Guard prevention and response", 59 "Marine industry training programs", and 60 "Training course on workings of Congress", prior to repeal by Pub. L. 115–282, title I, §104(a), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4196.

#### Amendments

**2022**—Pub. L. 117–263, div. K, title CXII, §§11225(b), 11251(b), title CXIII, §11309(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 4025, 4053, 4081, added items 315, 319, and 323 and struck out former items 315 "Training course on workings of Congress" and 319 "Land-based unmanned aircraft system program".

**2021**—Pub. L. 116–283, div. G, title LVXXXII [LXXXII], §8211(b), title LVXXXV [LXXXV], §8501(b)(1), Jan. 1, 2021, 134 Stat. 4649, 4746, added items 321 and 322.

**2019**—Pub. L. 116–92, div. A, title V, §519(b), Dec. 20, 2019, 133 Stat. 1351, added item 320.

**2018**—Pub. L. 115–282, title I, §104(a), title III, §304(c)(1), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4196, 4245, inserted chapter 3 designation and heading and added items 301 to 319.
p130051.eng INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0051 Focus Ready Draft 11/19/2012 ENGINEER: Choudhary \ JAS PV (kg/yr):

SUBMITTER:
USE:

OTHER USES:

Page 1p130051.eng

SAT (concerns) (11/06/2012): Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info: Ecotox Related Cases: Migration to groundwater: Negligible PBT rating: P1B1T2 . Health: 2 Dermal, Drinking Water, Inhalation Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 1 ppb.)
OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 1D
NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS: Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER.

Page 2p130051.eng

Page 3p130051.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0051

Page 4p130051.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0051

Page 5p130051.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0051

Page 6p130051.eng

INITIAL REVIEW ENGINEERING REPORT PMN: 13-0051 Page 7p130051.eng

Page 8p130051.eng

Page 9
### §3373. Effect of certain natural gas prices on indefinite price escalator clauses

#### (a) High-cost natural gas

No price paid in any first sale of high-cost natural gas (as defined in section 3317(c) 1 of this title, as such section was in effect on January 1, 1989) may be taken into account in applying any indefinite price escalator clause (as defined in section 3315(b)(3)(B) 1 of this title, as such section was in effect on January 1, 1989) with respect to any first sale of any natural gas other than high-cost natural gas (as defined in section 3317(c) 1 of this title, as such section was in effect on January 1, 1989).

#### (b) Other transactions

No price paid—

(1) in any sale authorized under section 3362(a) of this title, or

(2) pursuant to any order issued under section 3363(b), (c), (d), or (g) of this title,

may be taken into account in applying any indefinite price escalator clause (as defined in section 3315(b)(3)(B) 1 of this title, as such section was in effect on January 1, 1989).

(Pub. L. 95–621, title III, §313, Nov. 9, 1978, 92 Stat. 3392; Pub. L. 101–60, §3(b)(3), July 26, 1989, 103 Stat. 159.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Sections 3315 and 3317 of this title, referred to in text, were repealed effective Jan. 1, 1993, by Pub. L. 101–60, §2(b), July 26, 1989, 103 Stat. 158.

#### Amendments

1989—Pub. L. 101–60 inserted ", as such section was in effect on January 1, 1989" in four places.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1989 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 101–60 effective Jan. 1, 1993, see section 3(b) of Pub. L. 101–60, set out as a note under section 3372 of this title.

1 See References in Text note below.
#### § 592.370 Certificate issuance.

When performing inspection service at locations other than an official establishment, inspection program personnel shall issue a certificate covering each product inspected. An applicant may request issuance of a certificate for each production lot inspected.