alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

WILLIAM MEDEI
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 2242

[ March 11, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; John J. Murphy, III , Judge; L.T. Case No. 09

- 00 5151

- CF

- 10A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Ian Seldin, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Matthew Steven Ocksrider, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, D AMOORGIAN and A RTAU

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
§ 1815.1-2 Applications. ( a ) *Place of filing.* The application for relief shall be filed in the office which issued the contract.
( b ) *Form of application.* No special form of application is necessary.
( c ) *Contents of application.* ( 1 ) The date of issuance of the contract and any identification number.
( 2 ) The particular disaster and its effect upon contract performance.
( 3 ) An estimate of the damages suffered.
( 4 ) A statement of the relief requested.
( 5 ) An estimate of time which will be needed to overcome the delay in performance caused by the disaster.
- CtrExh03-01-LTCR: Contractor Exhibit 03-01May 01, 2003, Letter Re: LTCR
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

OMAR JOSE LOPEZ MARQUEZ,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1287

[June 1, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; August A. Bonavita, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502020CO003740A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Elijah Giuliano, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and MaryEllen M. Farrell

and Sorraya M. Solages-Jones, Assistant Attorneys General, West Palm 

Beach, for appellee.

Helene C. Hvizd, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Palm Beach County 

Attorney’s Office, for Amicus Curiae Palm Beach County.

On the State’s Concession

MAY, J.

The defendant appealed his sentence for violating Palm Beach County 

Ordinance 18-7 for solicitation and distribution on public roads after the 

trial court denied his motion to dismiss. He argued the court erred in 

denying his motion to dismiss because the ordinance violated his first 

amendment rights. On April 27, 2022, the County repealed the ordinance.

The State has now filed a concession. “[T]he repeal of the statute 

pending an appeal will deprive the appellate court of any power to render 

a judgment by which this penalty may be enforced, and that the effect of 

a repealing statute is to obliterate the statute repealed as completely as if 

it had never been enacted . . . .” Pensacola & A.R. Co. v. State, 33 So. 985, 
2

986 (Fla. 1903). The State concedes the case should be remanded with 

instructions for the trial court to vacate the withhold of adjudication, 

permit the defendant to withdraw his plea, and the State to nolle prosse

the charge. The defendant has responded and indicated we should simply 

reverse and remand the case for dismissal of the charges. Id. (“It follows 

from what has been said that the judgment of the circuit court in said 

cause must be reversed, and the cause dismissed.”). We agree with the 

defendant. We therefore reverse and remand the case for that purpose.

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
§ 3410.2-2 Environmental analysis. ( a ) Before an exploration license may be issued, the authorized officer shall prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, if necessary, of the potential effects of the proposed exploration on the natural and socio-economic environment of the affected area. No exploration license shall be issued if the exploration would: ( 1 ) Result in disturbance that would cause significant and lasting degradation to the lands or injury to improvements, or in any disturbance other than that necessary to determine the nature of the overlying strata and the depth, thickness, shape, grade, quantity, quality or hydrologic conditions of the coal deposits; or
( 2 ) Jeopardize the continued existence of a threatened or endangered species of fauna or flora or destroy or cause adverse modification to its critical habitat. No exploration license shall be issued until after compliance with sections 105 and 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470(f)) with respect to any cultural resources which might be affected by any activity under the exploration license.
( b ) The authorized officer shall include in each exploration license requirements and stipulations to protect the environment and associated natural resources and to ensure reclamation of the lands disturbed by the exploration.
[47 FR 33135, July 30, 1982, as amended at 50 FR 8626, Mar. 4, 1985]
### §26. Repealed. Pub. L. 89–554, §8(a), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 632

Section, R.S. §2052, provided for appointment of Indian Agents by the President.
#### § 23.13 Consultation.

Whenever the lands included in a permit, lease, or contract are under the jurisdiction of an agency other than the Department of the Interior or under the jurisdiction of a bureau of the Department of the Interior other than the Bureau of Land Management, the mining supervisor or the district manager, as appropriate, shall consult the authorized officer of such agency before taking any final action under §§ 23.7, 23.8, 23.10 (c) and (d) (2) and (3), and 23.11(c).
|   | (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ ROBERT F.      MANGANO |                                       |
|----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
| Name:                 | Robert F.      Mangano                     |   |
| Title:                | President and Chief      Executive Officer |   |
| Date:                      | April 15,    2008                          |   |

| /s/ JOSEPH M.      REARDON   |                                    |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| Name:                        | Joseph M.      Reardon                  |   |
| Title:                            | Senior      Vice President andTreasurer |   |
| Date:                        | April 15,    2008                       |   |
|                                   |                                    |   |

----
12/08/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0539

-. FILED

UNIGINAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Case No. DA 20-0539

ESTATE OF WILLIAM H. BALTRUSCH,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

LASALLE RANCH, INC.

Respondent and Appellant.

LASALLE RANCH, INC.,

Petitioner and Appellant,

v.

HILL COUNTY JUSTICE COURT,

AUDREY BARGER, PRESIDING JUDGE,

Respondent and Appellee.

Bowen Greenwood

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF MONTANA

FILFD

DEC 0 8 2020

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of Supreme Court

State of Montane

ORDER GRANTING

RESPONDENT AND APPELLEE'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM

MANDATORY APPELLATE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

01/15/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0539
Upon review of Respondent and Appellee's Motion for Relief from

Mandatory Appellate Alternative Dispute Resolution, with no objection and good

cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED Respondent and Appellee Hill County Justice

Court, Audrey Barger Presiding, is not subject to mediation pursuant to Mont. R.

App. Proc. 7(2), and is relieved from participation with the Mandatory Appellate

Alternative Disposition Resolution in this case.

Dated

\
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 27, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 132617 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 132617 COA: 272525 Oakland CC: 04-199649-FC THEREZ LEE, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 10, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0220 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 27, 2007

Clerk
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 26, 2009

d0623 

# Order

June 26, 2009

139007

In re RICHARD CHARLES GEORGE, CHARENZE ANTHONY, LORENZO ANTHONY, JR., CAND ANCE ANTHONY, and DEMETRIUS ANTHONY, Minors.

________________ _______________ __________/

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, Petitioner-Appellee,

v SC: 139007 COA: 286896 Wayne CC Family Division: LORENZO ANTHONY, 07-475133-NA Respondent-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 14, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE MARCH
31, 2000 FORM 10-Q OF IOWA FIRST BANCSHARES CORP. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          13,532
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 3,475
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     66,585
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        273,601
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,128
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 363,823
<DEPOSITS>                                     263,644
<SHORT-TERM>                                     4,715
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,038
<LONG-TERM>                                     71,823
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           200
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,403
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 363,823
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,493
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  954
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    97
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 6,544
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               2,464
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,655
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,889
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       42
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   8
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,083
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,288
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         884
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       884
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,091
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        5
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,128
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,128
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 28, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 57916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-21637]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL


Appraisal Subcommittee; 60 Day Notice of Intent to Request 
Clearance for Extension of Collection of Information; Opportunity for 
Public Comment

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee, Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of intent to request from the Office of Management and 
Budget (``OMB'') clearance for extension of collections of information 
and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 
CFR part 1320, Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, the Appraisal 
Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council 
(``ASC'') is soliciting comments on the need for the collection of 
information contained in 12 CFR part 1102, subpart D, Description of 
Office, Procedures, Public Information. The ASC also requests comments 
on the practical utility of the collection of information; the accuracy 
of the burden hour estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 
clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the 
burden to respondents, including use of automated information 
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

DATES: Comments on this information collection must be received on or 
before November 29, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Ben Henson, Executive Director, Appraisal 
Subcommittee, 2000 K Street, NW., Suite 310, Washington, DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marc L. Weinberg, General Counsel, 
Appraisal Subcommittee, at 2000 K Street, NW., Suite 310, Washington, 
DC 20006 or 202-293-6250.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: 12 CFR part 1102, subpart D; Description of Office, 
Procedures, Public Information.
    ASC Form Number: None.
    OMB Number: 3139-0006.
    Expiration Date: Three years from OMB approval date.
    Type of Request: Extension of existing collection of information.
    Description of Need: The information sets out detailed procedures 
implementing the Freedom of Information Act, as amended. 12 U.S.C. 552.
    Automated Data Collection: None.
    Description of Respondents: State, local or Tribal government; 
individuals or households, business or other for-profit institutions; 
not-for-profit institutions; farms; and Federal government.
    Estimated Average Number of Respondents: 11 respondents.
    Estimated Average Number of Responses: Once per respondent.
    Estimated Average Burden Hours Per Response: .5 hours.
    Estimated Annual Reporting Burden: 5.5 hours.

    By the Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial 
Institutions Examination Council.

    Dated: September 22, 2004.
Ben Henson,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 04-21637 Filed 9-27-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6700-01-P
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean

1 200 196 198

2 203 197 199

3 203 199 201

4 205 201 203

5 206 202 204

6 210 203 205

7 210 204 207

8 213 202 206

9 211 203 205

10 209 204 206

11 210 204 207

12 212 206 208

13 213 206 208

14 212 206 208

15 213 208 211

16 215 211 213

17 218 214 216

18 0 0 0

19 222 215 218

20 221 212 216

21 218 207 214

22 219 209 213

23 219 209 214

24 215 207 211

25 215 208 212

26 216 209 213

27 217 210 214

28 220 212 217

29 222 216 219

30 222 213 217

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Victoria Canal On The Middle River

Period: September 2023 Run Date: 10/6/2023
#### § 2310.1-1 Preapplication consultation.

A potential applicant should contact the appropriate State office of the Bureau of Land Management well in advance of the anticipated submission date of an application. Early consultation can familiarize the potential applicant with the responsibilities of an applicant, the authorized officer and the Secretary. Early consultation also will assist in determining the need for a withdrawal, taking possible alternatives into account, increase the likelihood that the applicant's needs will be considered in ongoing land use planning, assist in determining the extent to which any public lands that may be involved would have to be segregated if an application is submitted; and result in preliminary determinations regarding the scheduling of various investigations, studies, analyses, public meetings and negotiations that may be required for a withdrawal. Studies and analyses should be programmed to ensure their completion in sufficient time to allow the Secretary or the Congress adequate time to act on the application before the expiration of the segregation period.
#### § 3264.14 How do I notify BLM of accidents occurring on my lease?

You must orally inform us of all accidents that affect operations or create environmental hazards within 24 hours of the accident. When you contact us, we may require you to submit a written report fully describing the incident.
#### § 2912.2 Renewal of leases.

A lessee with a privilege of renewal must notify the authorized officer at least 180 days before the end of the lease period that it will exercise the privilege.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 April 3, 2015

p0331

Order 

Clerk

April 3, 2015

151195

In re WARE, Minors. SC: 151195

COA: 322564

Oakland CC Family Division:

13-812007-NA

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 26, 2015 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
§ 30.400 What may be purchased at probate? ( a ) The judge may allow an eligible purchaser to purchase at probate all or part of the trust or restricted land in the estate of a person who died on or after June 20, 2006. Any interest in trust or restricted land, including a life estate that is part of the estate (*i.e.,* a life estate owned by the decedent but measured by the life of someone who survives the decedent), may be purchased at probate, except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) Purchase of minerals-only real property interests (*i.e.,* an allotment that does not include a surface interest) may be considered for purchase at probate only if sufficient evidence of the fair market value of the real property interest is submitted. No interest in a minerals-only property may be purchased at probate on the basis of the value of the minerals themselves.
**DM** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0497 CITY OF BOZEMAN,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RICHARD WARREN DUMAS, III,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including June 16 , 2021 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 11 2021

05/11/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0497
have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial. Hill v.

Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 58-59 (1985); Kirksey v. State, 112 Nev. 980, 988, 923 P.2d 1102, 1107 (1996). Both components of the inquiry must be shown. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 697 (1984). We give deference to the court's factual findings if supported by substantial evidence and not clearly erroneous but review the court's application of the law to those facts de novo. Lader v. Warden, 121 Nev. 682, 686, 120 P.3d 1164, 1166 (2005).

The district court conducted an evidentiary hearing at which Abad's plea counsel testified that he discussed the potential immigration consequences with Abad before he entered the plea and specifically advised him that a gross misdemeanor could have adverse immigration consequences. This testimony was supported by the record, and the district court found that this testimony was credible and the plea was very favorable to Abad. The district court held that counsel was not ineffective, the plea was freely and voluntarily entered, and there was no manifest injustice warranting withdrawal of the plea, see NRS 176.165.

The district court's findings are supported by substantial evidence and are not clearly wrong. Abad did not demonstrate that his counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the deportation consequences of entering his plea. See Rubio v. State, 124 Nev. 1032, 1043, 194 P.3d 1224, 1232 (2008). Further, even assuming counsel was deficient for not informing him that pleading guilty to a gross misdemeanor could subject him to automatic deportation, see Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. „ 130 S. Ct. 1473, 1483 (2010), Abad failed to demonstrate prejudice because he pleaded guilty to a "wobbler," the State was free to argue for the felony conviction at sentencing, and Abad knew

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A 2-,.‘1%1'.. -"-iatRAINNIEltellarif

, ?.. 1 1

. ffMtikitatiSEMBEEKIIIM that imposition of sentence was at the discretion of the district court and if he was convicted of the felony he would be subject to automatic deportation. We conclude that the district court correctly assessed the validity of Abad's plea, Abad failed to demonstrate manifest injustice warranting withdrawal of his plea, and the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Abad's motion to withdraw the plea. Therefore, we

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

j

. Hardesty


## Ok-.-

- 6'r ------Th Parraguirre Cherry
cc: Hon. Stefany Miley, District Judge Don P. Chairez Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A 3