alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(No. 00008

#### Patricia R. Deal, as wife of Donald Deal, deceased, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed September 25, 1972.*

*399Patricia R. Deal, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, and Vincent J. Biskupic, Special Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Burks, J.

This claim, arising out of the death of a volunteer fireman, Donald Deal, of the Hoffman Estates Fire Protection District, was filed pursuant to provisions of the “Law Enforcement Officer and Firemen Compensation Act,” *Ch. 48, Sec. 281 et seq., Ill.Rev. Stat., 1971.*Claimant, Patricia R. Deal, is the surviving spouse of the decedent and is the lawful claimant under Section 283(a) of the Act.

A hearing in this matter was held by the Court on August 3, 1972. The facts, which are not in dispute, are as follows: Donald Deal was a volunteer fireman for the Hoffman Estates Fire Protection District at the time of his death. On August 6, 1970, he reported for a scheduled fire department drill at approximately 9:30 a.m. Prior to the start of the drill, the decedent complained of a nauseous feeling and stated that his arms felt numb. He was instructed to sit down until he felt better. While he was resting, another fireman checked him and found that his condition had not improved. At 9:53 a.m. he was discovered in an unconscious condition and first aid measures were started. He was taken by ambulance to a hospital where he was pronounced dead on arrival. The death certificate recites that the immediate cause of death was “acute myocardial infarction” with the interval between onset and death “minutes”.

Mrs. Deal testified that her husband had returned home on the morning of the incident at approximately 2:30 a.m. *400complaining of pains in his chest and arms. Upon arising that morning he was still complaining of the same condition. There is no evidence to show that the decedent’s death occurred during the active performance of duties as a fireman, pursuant to Section 282(e) of the Act. In fact, the Application for Benefits filed herein as well as the Attorney General’s investigative report and the testimony elicited before this Court all indicated that the decedent had neyer embarked upon the performance of his duties on the date of his death.

There being no evidence to support a finding that Donald Deal was “killed in the line of duty” as defined in the Act, this claim must be denied. It is so ordered and this claim is denied.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23

              Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 Number 33-24107) pertaining to the Seattle FilmWorks, Inc. Incentive
Stock Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 Number 33-36020)
pertaining to the Seattle FilmWorks, Inc. 1987 Stock Option Plan, the
Registration Statement (Form S-8 Number 33-69530) pertaining to the Seattle
FilmWorks, Inc. 1993 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the Registration
Statements (Form S-8 Number 33-81332 and 333-02431) pertaining to the Seattle
FilmWorks, Inc. Amended and Restated Incentive Stock Option Plan and the Amended
and Restated 1987 Stock Option Plan of our report dated November 6, 1998, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Seattle
FilmWorks, Inc. included in its Amended Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year
ended September 26, 1998.


                                       /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Seattle, Washington
June 9, 1999
#### Richard Robert JOHNSON, Appellant, v. Darin Lee HAUGLAND; Dr. Dean A. Lee, Appellee.

No. 05-1784.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 1, 2006.

Filed: Feb. 22, 2006.

Richard Robert Johnson, Bayport, MN, pro se.

Mark Wells Hardy, Geraghty & O’Loughlin, St. Paul, MN, for Appellees.

Before MURPHY, HANSEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Minnesota inmate Richard Johnson filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against a doctor and a physical therapist, alleging they showed deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in treating his injured left knee. Johnson appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment, and he challenges orders denying his motions to recuse and for a default judgment. Following careful review of the record and the briefs, we find no grounds for reversal, and we affirm for the reasons *140stated by the district court. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Ann D. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
Third Department,

November, 1913.

#### Onondaga County Milk Association, Respondent, *v.*The State of New York, Appellant.

*Negligence*— *injury on canal bridge.*

Appeal by the defendant, The State of New York, from a determination of the Board of Claims, entered in the office of the clerk of said board on the 37th day of February, 1913, awarding the claimant the sum of $385.50 damages for injuries to a horse and wagon.

Woodward, J.:

The State of New York maintains and operates a bascule bridge over the Oswego canal in North Salina street, Syracuse. The claimant is a domestic corporation engaged in buying and selling milk, delivered to customers in the city of Syracuse by means of horses and wagons driven by its servants. On the morning of the 13th day of June, 1911, Michael Rolio, an employee of the claimant, started from the plant of the company with a load of milk to be delivered to customers. He was using a covered wagon, and it is undisputed that as he approached the bridge in question he was looking ahead through the glass window in the wagon. He testifies that he was fully awake, having delivered one load of milk that morning before the then trip; that he was looking and listening, and that when his horse and wagon were both upon the bridge he saw the defendant’s flagman run out from a shanty on the far side of the bridge and wave a flag; that the flagman came forward, stopped his for*926ward movement, and backed the horse off from the bridge, which was at that time being raised for the purpose of permitting a boat to pass through, and that the. horse and wagon fell off the edge of the bridge, doing the injuries for which this complaint was entered. There is a conflict of evidence upon the main facts. The State’s witness claims to have seen the claimant’s wagon when some eighty feet away from the bridge, and to have given warning by the waving of the flag and calling to the driver, in the meantime having signaled the man who operated the bridge to lift the same; but the Board of Claims was not bound to believe this testimony, and it certainly is not entitled to be held to outweigh that of the claimant’s witnesses. The case is one which no court would disturb as between private parties, and we see no reason for a different disposition here. The determination appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. Determination unanimously confirmed, with costs.
#### Morton Gache, Respondent, v. Joseph L. Morse et al., Copartners Doing Business under the Name of Book Give-Away Plan, et al., Appellants.

Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur.
### §1098b. Authorization of appropriations for administrative expenses

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 1993 and for each succeeding fiscal year thereafter for administrative expenses necessary for carrying out this subchapter, including expenses for staff personnel, program reviews, and compliance activities.

(Pub. L. 89–329, title IV, §493, as added Pub. L. 102–325, title IV, §497, July 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 634.)
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 23

                        PENNROCK FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP.

(Letterhead of Simon Lever & Company appears here)

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
PennRock Financial Services Corp. on Form S-3 (No. 33-10568) of our report dated
February 2, 2001 on the consolidated financial statements of PennRock Financial
Services Corp. and subsidiaries appearing in and incorporated by reference in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

                                                 /s/  SIMON LEVER & COMPANY

Lancaster, Pennsylvania
March 19, 2001
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

 Docket Number: FAA-2012-0807

 Directorate Identifier: 2011NM191AD

B/E 22CXX-0100-35-003 --- 3/17/11

B/E 1XCXX-0100-35-005 --- 3/14/11

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
CERTIFICATION

I, Robert W. Prokos, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A-2 of HealthRenu Medical,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures; and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's fourth fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which adversely affect
the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

Date: October 20, 2006


                                                 /s/ Robert W. Prokos
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Robert W. Prokos, President and
                                                 Chief Executive Officer
### **CHAPTER 54—LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION**
§ 9.34 Finger Lakes. ( a ) *Name.* The name of the viticultural area described in this section is “Finger Lakes.”
( b ) *Approved maps.* The appropriate maps for determining the boundaries of the Finger Lakes viticultural area are two U.S.G.S. maps scaled 1:250,000. They are entitled: ( 1 ) “Rochester,” Location diagram NK 18-1, 1961; and
( 2 ) “Elmira,” Location diagram NK 18-4, 1968.
( c ) *Boundaries.* The boundaries of the Finger Lakes viticultural area, based on landmarks and points of reference found on the approved maps, are as follows: ( 1 ) Starting at the most northwest point, the intersection of the Erie Canal and the north/south Conrail line south of the City of Rochester.
( 2 ) Then east along the course of the Erie Canal approximately 56 miles (45 miles due east) to the intersection of New York State Highway 89 (NY-89).
( 3 ) Then south on NY-89 four miles to the intersection of highway US-20.
( 4 ) Then east on US-20 for 36 miles to the intersection of interstate 81 (I-81).
( 5 ) Then south along I-81 for ten miles to NY-281.
( 6 ) Then south along NY-281 for 20 miles around the western city limits of Cortland where NY-281 becomes NY-13.
( 7 ) Then continuing southwest on NY-13 (through the cities of Dryden and Ithaca) approximately 36 miles to the intersection of NY-224.
( 8 ) Then due west one mile to the southern boundary of Schuyler County.
( 9 ) Then continuing west along this county line 20 miles to the community of Meads Creek.
( 10 ) Then north along the Schuyler-Steuben county line four miles to the major east-west power line.
( 11 ) Then west along the power line for eight miles to the intersection of NY-17 (four miles southeast of the community of Bath).
( 12 ) Then northwest on NY-17 approximately nine miles to the intersection of I-390.
( 13 ) Then northwest on I-390 for 21 miles to the intersection of NY-36.
( 14 ) Then north for two miles through the community of Dansville to NY-63.
( 15 ) Then northwest on NY-63 approximately 18 miles to the intersection of NY-39, just south of Genesco.
( 16 ) Then north on NY-39 nine miles to the intersection where the west and north/south Conrail lines meet at the community of Avon.
( 17 ) Then north along the north/south Conrail line for 15 miles to the beginning point at the intersection of the Erie Canal.
[T.D. ATF-113, 47 FR 38518, Sept. 1, 1982, as amended by T.D. ATF-249, 52 FR 5956, Feb. 27, 1987]
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 956.50

 956.67

 956.82

 956.92

 957.00

 957.08

 956.95

 957.03

 957.12

 957.21

 957.30

 957.39

 957.48

 957.58

 957.67

 957.75

 957.86

 957.78

 957.86

 957.95

 957.88

 957.85

 957.99

 958.14

 958.29

 958.46

 958.61

 958.58

 958.72

 958.87

 1,104.7

 1,106.0

 1,107.2

 1,108.0

 1,108.6

 1,109.2

 1,108.2

 1,108.8

 1,109.5

 1,110.2

 1,110.9

 1,111.6

 1,112.3

 1,113.0

 1,113.7

 1,114.3

 1,115.2

 1,114.6

 1,115.2

 1,115.9

 1,115.4

 1,115.1

 1,116.2

 1,117.4

 1,118.5

 1,119.8

 1,121.0

 1,120.8

 1,121.9

 1,123.0

STORAGE

+1.0

+1.3

+1.2

+0.8

+0.6

+0.6

-1.0

+0.6

+0.7

+0.7

+0.7

+0.7

+0.7

+0.8

+0.7

+0.6

+0.8

-0.6

+0.6

+0.7

-0.5

-0.2

+1.1

+1.2

+1.2

+1.3

+1.2

-0.2

+1.1

+1.2

CHANGE

524

683

601

417

332

369

445

336

370

371

371

430

369

408

361

345

464

351

360

381

368

422

563

622

614

672

601

573

562

600

INFLOW

 6

 5

 6

 5

 5

 43

 938

 6

 5

 6

 4

 63

 4

 4

 4

 4

 4

 625

 4

 4

 628

 527

 4

 17

 5

 4

 5

 680

 5

 5

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 15

 20

 15

 25

 17

 15

 12

 20

 15

 15

 17

 17

 15

 15

 7

 30

 32

 37

 45

 27

 12

 12

 15

 20

 23

 5

 10

 10

 10

 10

C.F.S.

 .06

 .08

 .06

 .10

 .07

 .06

 .05

 .08

 .06

 .06

 .07

 .07

 .06

 .06

 .03

 .12

 .13

 .15

 .18

 .11

 .05

 .05

 .06

 .08

 .09

 .02

 .04

 .04

 .04

 .04

INCHES

 .09

 1.12

 .04

 1.06

 .00

 .00

 .02

 .00

 .15

 .01

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .26

 .12

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

NOVEMBER 2008 NEW MELONES LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: December 1, 2008

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +19.6 13,885 3,625 0 0 538 2.17 2.87

ACRE-FEET +19,600 27,541 7,190 0 0 1,067

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 7,190

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 7,190

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 2.87

JULY 1, 2008 3.28

 1,103.7
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 860.60

 860.78

 861.08

 861.44

 861.71

 861.89

 862.11

 862.27

 862.39

 862.54

 862.69

 863.29

 863.56

 863.86

 864.12

 864.32

 864.50

 864.72

 865.01

 865.34

 865.59

 865.86

 866.18

 866.42

 866.66

 866.94

 867.01

 867.14

 867.23

 867.26

 867.47

 514.1

 515.0

 516.4

 518.1

 519.4

 520.2

 521.3

 522.1

 522.6

 523.4

 524.1

 527.0

 528.3

 529.7

 531.0

 532.0

 532.8

 533.9

 535.3

 536.9

 538.2

 539.5

 541.0

 542.2

 543.4

 544.8

 545.1

 545.8

 546.2

 546.4

 547.4

STORAGE

+1.0

+0.9

+1.4

+1.7

+1.3

+0.9

+1.1

+0.8

+0.6

+0.7

+0.7

+2.9

+1.3

+1.5

+1.3

+1.0

+0.9

+1.1

+1.4

+1.6

+1.2

+1.3

+1.6

+1.2

+1.2

+1.4

+0.3

+0.6

+0.4

+0.1

+1.0

CHANGE

675

718

943

1,286

942

737

567

675

626

788

1,020

1,574

706

757

646

756

835

670

723

826

729

888

843

741

668

725

641

620

581

569

612

INFLOW

 172

 275

 222

 419

 278

 298

 25

 275

 324

 406

 646

 33

 43

 21

 8

 261

 381

 126

 10

 10

 58

 207

 46

 142

 70

 21

 463

 291

 344

 488

 78

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 0

 12

 2

 0

 14

 5

 11

 12

 11

 19

 11

 84

 5

 5

 3

 5

 13

 5

 3

 3

 55

 16

 6

 5

 3

 11

 5

 5

 13

 6

 11

C.F.S.

 .00

 .08

 .01

 .00

 .09

 .03

 .07

 .08

 .07

 .12

 .07

 .54

 .03

 .03

 .02

 .03

 .08

 .03

 .02

 .02

 .35

 .10

 .04

 .03

 .02

 .07

 .03

 .03

 .08

 .04

 .07

INCHES

 .90

 .02

 .50

 .81

 .01

 .07

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 2.63

 .25

 .00

 .00

 .29

 .58

 .00

 .00

 .55

 .05

 .05

 .00

 .00

 .15

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2014 NEW MELONES LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: January 5, 2015

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +34.4 24,087 6,441 0 0 359 2.28 6.86

ACRE-FEET +34,400 47,777 12,776 0 0 712

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 12,776

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 12,776

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 6.86

JULY 1, 2014 10.81

 513.1
###### Editorial Note on Part 46

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 46 appear by T.D. ATF-457, 66 FR 32220, 32221, June 14, 2001.

#### § 46.232 Preparation of floor stocks tax return.

The dealer must complete and file the floor stocks tax return in accordance with the instructions for the form.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-6683

SAMUEL WILLIAMS FEREBEE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JERRY G. MONETTE; GEORGE L. ADKINS; ELLA

BULLOCK,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Joseph C. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-00-87-5-H)

Submitted: October 24, 2001 Decided: November 15, 2001

Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marvin R. Sparrow, SPARROW & VANDENBERG, Durham, North Carolina,

for Appellant. Scott C. Hart, SUMRELL, SUGG, CARMICHAEL, HICKS &

HART, P.A., New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Samuel Williams Ferebee appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint.

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Ferebee v. Monette, No. CA-00-87-5-H

(E.D.N.C. filed Mar.14, 2001; entered Mar. 15, 2001). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                          10,703
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,703
<PP&E>                                          77,695
<DEPRECIATION>                                  57,437
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 225,961
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,673,576
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        27,719
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,795,334)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   225,961
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (4,896,798)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,952
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,905,750)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,905,750)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Order entered September 6 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 17 - 01108 - CR No. 05 - 17 - 01109 - CR TERRENCE MIMS, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F 15 - 58852 - T & F16 - 60694 - T



### O RDER The State’s August 29, 2018 second motion to extend the time to file its brief is hereby GRANTED, and the brief is ordered filed.

/s/ LAN A MYERS JUSTICE