alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
them, wrestled with the asset protection specialist, and "tried to make 

physical contact with [the assistant store manager] by trying to swing at 

him." The asset protection specialist testified that prior to the 

confrontation, she verbally identified herself to Monroe as "Home Depot 

security" and while doing so "might have touched his hand." Surveillance 

videotape of the incident was played for the jury. 

Circumstantial evidence alone may sustain a conviction. 

Buchanan v. State, 119 Nev. 201, 217, 69 P.3d 694, 705 (2003). It is for 

the jury to determine the weight and credibility to give conflicting 

testimony, McNair v. State, 108 Nev. 53, 56, 825 P.2d 571, 573 (1992), and 

a jury's verdict will not be disturbed on appeal where, as here, sufficient 

evidence supports the verdict, Bolden v. State, 97 Nev. 71, 73, 624 P.2d 20, 

20 (1981); see also NRS 200.380(1). Therefore, we conclude that Monroe's 

contention is without merit. 

Second, Monroe contends that the district court erred by 

rejecting his proposed jury instruction defining "larceny." Monroe fails to 

offer any cogent argument or legal authority in support of his claim and 

we need not address it. See Maresca v. State, 103 Nev. 669, 673, 748 P.2d 

3, 6 (1987). Nevertheless, we note that the State met its burden of proof 

on the greater offense of robbery and Monroe's contention is without merit. 

See Lisby v. State, 82 Nev. 183, 188, 414 P.2d 592, 595 (1966) (holding that 

"if the prosecution has met its burden of proof on the greater offense and 

there is no evidence at the trial tending to reduce the greater offense, an 

instruction on a lesser included offense may properly be refused"); see also 

Davis v. State, 110 Nev. 1107, 1115, 881 P.2d 657, 662 (1994). Therefore, 

we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by rejecting 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2 
Hardesty 

Monroe's proposed instruction. See Ouanbengboune v. State, 125 Nev. 

763, 774, 220 P.3d 1122, 1129 (2009). Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 

Parraguirre Cherry 

cc: Hon. Brent T. Adams, District Judge 

Janet S. Bessemer 

Michael V. Roth 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe County District Attorney 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A • , s 

3
#### § 4.1306 Notice of hearing.

The administrative law judge shall give notice of the time and place of the hearing to all interested parties. The hearing shall be of record and governed by 5 U.S.C. 554.
#### § 3743.4 Effect of decision affirming a mining claimant's rights.

If, pursuant to a hearing held as provided in the regulations of this part, the final decision rendered in the matter shall affirm the validity and effectiveness of any mining claimant's right or interest under a mining claim as to Leasing Act minerals, then no subsequent proceedings under section 7 of the Act and the regulations of this part shall have any force or effect upon the so-affirmed right or interest of such mining claimant under such mining claim.
Exhibit 32.1

 

Certification under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with the Amendment No. 2 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hampton Roads Bankshares, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2013 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Report”), we, Douglas Glenn, Chief Executive Officer, and Thomas B. Dix, III, Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:

 

|  | a)The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and |
|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

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

 

|   |                            |
|--------|---------------------------------|
|   | /s/ Douglas J. Glenn            |
|   | Douglas J. Glenn                |
|   | Chief Executive Officer         |
|   | Date:  March 26, 2014 |

 

 

 

|   |                            |
|--------|---------------------------------|
|   | /s/ Thomas B. Dix, III          |
|   | Thomas B. Dix, III              |
|   | Chief Financial Officer         |
|   | Date:  March 26, 2014 |

 

 

----
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

ALLEN RUSSELL, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-1877

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed April 4, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands 

County; Peter F. Estrada, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and John C. Fisher, Assistant Public 

Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

LaROSE, C.J., and CASANUEVA and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         731,530
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,904,398
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (550,675)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          17,544
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (10,089)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,610,308
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          131,961
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,330
<OTHER-SE>                                  (2,223,993)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,610,308
<SALES>                                      1,012,026
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               558,536
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                46,909
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             397,040
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,541
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,541
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,541
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

OF MAX CAPITAL GROUP LTD.

I, W. Marston Becker, the
Chief Executive Officer of Max Capital Group Ltd., certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed the Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 of Max Capital Group Ltd. (the Amendment
No. 1); and
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | Based on my knowledge, the Amendment No. 1 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 them period covered by this report.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:
April 1, 2009



/s/ W. MARSTON BECKERW. Marston BeckerChief Executive Officer
#### Georgina G. Maxwell, on Behalf of Herself and All Other Heirs at Law and Next of Kin of Margaret J. and Sarah E. Maurice, Deceased, Respondent, v. Susan C. Hoge, Appellant, and Others, Defendants.

Orders affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to respondent on each appeal. No opinion. Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Carr, Rich and Stapleton, JJ., concurred.
# Wine Chillers and Miscellaneous Refrigeration Products Framework Document Public Meeting
DATE: February 22, 2012 TIME: 9:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. EDT LOCATION: U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Room 8E-089 Washington, DC 20585 The Department of Energy will hold an informal public meeting on February 22, 2012, to discuss and receive comments on issues addressed in the Framework Document on prospective energy conservation standards and the initiation of data collection for wine chillers and miscellaneous refrigeration products. Note: This is a preliminary announcement. More information about this meeting, including the deadline for submitting comments, will be provided upon publication of the announcement in the Federal Register. The agenda and presentation file for this meeting will be provided within one week prior to the meeting. 

## How to Submit Comments The deadline for submitting comments will be 30 days after the publication date of the Federal Register Notice announcing this meeting. 

## Contact Information Lucas Adin Email: lucas.adin@ee.doe.gov Phone: 202-287-1317
§ 11.33 What types of assessment procedures are available? There are two types of assessment procedures: ( a ) Type A procedures are simplified procedures that require minimal field observation. Subpart D describes the type A procedures. There are two type A procedures: a procedure for coastal or marine environments, which incorporates the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Model for Coastal and Marine Environments, Version 2.51 (NRDAM/CME); and a procedure for Great Lakes environments, which incorporates the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Model for Great Lakes Environments, Version 1.51 (NRDAM/GLE).
( b ) Type B procedures require more extensive field observation than the type A procedures. Subpart E describes the type B procedures.
[61 FR 20610, May 7, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 60459, Nov. 10, 1997; 65 FR 6014, Feb. 8, 2000]
§ 3601.6 Policy. It is BLM's policy: ( a ) To make mineral materials available unless it is detrimental to the public interest to do so;
( b ) To sell mineral material resources at not less than fair market value;
( c ) To permit Federal, State, Territorial, and local government entities and non-profit organizations free use of these materials for qualified purposes;
( d ) To protect public land resources and the environment and minimize damage to public health and safety during the exploration for and the removal of such minerals;
( e ) To prevent unauthorized removal of mineral materials; and
( f ) To require purchasers and permittees to account for all removals of mineral materials.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 193 (Wednesday, October 6, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 59990]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22439]


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

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Illnesses; Notice of 
Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public 
Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Research Advisory 
Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses will meet on October 25-26, 
2004, at the Department of Veterans Affairs, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., 
Room 819, Washington, DC. The session on October 25 will convene at 8 
a.m. and adjourn at 5 p.m. The session on October 26 will convene at 8 
a.m. and adjourn at 3 p.m. Both sessions will be open to the public.
    The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice and make 
recommendations to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on proposed 
research studies, research plans and research strategies relating to 
the health consequences of military service in the Southwest Asia 
theater of operations during the Gulf War.
    The Committee will review VA program activities related to Gulf War 
veterans' illnesses. The Committee will also hear presentations on data 
collection related to exposures and troop locations during the 1991 
Gulf War and the current deployments in Iraq. There will be an update 
on scientific research on Gulf War illnesses published since the lost 
committee meeting. Additionally there will be preliminary information 
on treatment research for Gulf War illnesses, research related to 
possible health effects of exposure to oil well fires and other 
combustible petroleum products during the 1991 Gulf War, and discussion 
of committee business and activities.
    Members of the public may submit written statements for the 
Committee's review to Ms. Preeti Hans, Designated Federal Officer, 
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20420. Any member of the public seeking additional information should 
contact Ms. Preeti Hans at (202) 254-0223.

    Dated: September 28, 2004.
    By Direction of the Secretary.
E. Philip Riggin,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-22439 Filed 10-6-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
Electrical Conductivity, UMHOS

Day High Low Mean 30 DAY ACCUM MEAN 30 DAY AVG MEAN

1 0 0 0 1,620 54

2 285 268 279 1,899 63

3 275 242 250 2,149 72

4 242 227 232 2,267 76

5 227 223 225 2,384 79

6 258 226 243 2,517 84

7 266 260 263 2,659 89

8 261 222 240 2,768 92

9 221 202 209 2,977 99

10 205 186 198 3,050 102

11 0 0 0 2,935 98

12 0 0 0 2,821 94

13 142 136 140 2,846 95

14 0 0 0 2,734 91

15 0 0 0 2,623 87

16 142 132 138 2,647 88

17 0 0 0 2,536 85

18 0 0 0 2,417 81

19 0 0 0 2,417 81

20 204 185 197 2,614 87

21 0 0 0 2,614 87

22 0 0 0 2,614 87

23 0 0 0 2,614 87

24 0 0 0 2,614 87

25 0 0 0 2,614 87

26 0 0 0 2,614 87

27 214 194 203 2,817 94

28 214 206 211 3,028 101

29 208 186 194 3,222 107

30 0 0 0 3,222 107

31 0 0 0 3,222 107

COMMENT(S):

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

Historical Archive and Report Database

Vernalis On The San Joaquin River

Period: August 2023 Run Date: 10/11/2023
§ 35.30 The hearing and burden of proof. ( a ) The ALJ shall conduct a hearing on the record in order to determine whether the defendant is liable for a civil penalty or assessment under § 35.3 of this part and, if so, the appropriate amount of any such civil penalty or assessment considering any aggravating or mitigating factors.
( b ) The authority shall prove defendant's liability and any aggravating factors by a preponderance of the evidence.
( c ) The defendant shall prove any affirmative defenses and any mitigating factors by a preponderance of the evidence.
( d ) The hearing shall be open to the public unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ for food cause shown.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-02-15T01:55:55-0500
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
# WILLIAMS

Don Townsend Vice President/ Engineering

U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 Attn: Mr. Ronald PLewis RE: Request for information reguarding possible standby and off mode energy use for unvented heaters

Dear Mr. Lewis, I am responding to your lettersent to Mr. Warren Shoulders on March23rd. Here are our answers to the six questions asked in your letter.


### 1. Yes, Williams manufactures unvented fossil-fueled heaters. Pilot lights consume approximately 1000 BTU. 2. No, we are not aware of an unvented fossil-fueled heaterthat has electrical standby and off mode energy use. 3. No 4. No, we are not aware of any such studies. 5. Measuring the usage rates is not perceived to be a problem. Changing the existing standby mode for a fossil-fuel standby mode is possible, but will require engineering, testing, tooling and may increase the cost ofthe unit which is already cost sensitive. Additionally, the cost of using standby electrical consumption would need to be compared to the fossil-fuel standby use to see which is the better in the long run. Lastly, let's not forget the utility ofthe product that does not require electricity as these products are used whereelectricity is not available. We would be glad to assist DOE in the standards writing process as we do with CSA and UL. 6. Yes, the standard (62301) is straight forward on how to measure the standby and off mode electrical consumption.
I trust I have answered you questions satisfactorily, but ifyou have additional questions or if I can be of aSSistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Best Regards,

# ~€rWviJ 

# j**(~1j)** Donald LTownsendPHOENIX MANUfACTURING, INC. ·Camm/rredtoCustomerSuccess·· 

### 3655 EastRoeserRd. Phoenix,Arizona 85040 

### TO:

# O,~**~Y~:l~Q)J\\:- O~** **GrtQ.r~Cj** 

# \000**\n®~nu... ~·)0W** **Wo..~** 

# '"\'(\[?:}tOV\) 

# OC ;;l(YO**~S**



# EF.- ) r
### **CHAPTER 92—POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE**

Sec.
8021.
Powers.
8022.
Duties.
8023.
Additional powers to obtain data.
#### In the Matter of Chris L. Suess, Petitioner. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, Respondent.

All concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Department of the Air Force 

# AGENCY:

Department of the Air Force, DoD. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given of the forthcoming meeting of the 2004 Science and Technology Quality Review Panel. The purpose of the meeting is to allow the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board to assess the quality and long-term relevance of Air Force Research Laboratory Special Program research. Because classified and contractor-proprietary information will be discussed, this meeting will be closed to the public. 

# DATES:

15-18 November 2004. 

# ADDRESSES:

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Major Kyle Gresham, Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Secretariat, 1180 Air Force Pentagon, Rm. 5D982, Washington, DC 20330-1180, (703) 697-4808. 

Pamela D. Fitzgerald, 

Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 04-22443 Filed 10-5-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001-05-P
#### § 3933.40 Account status.

The BLM will not approve an assignment unless the lease or license account is in good standing.
---

Exhibit 13.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Alberta Star Development Corp. (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the period ended November 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Tim Coupland, Principal Executive Officer and I, Gordon Steblin, Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (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 result of operations of the Company.
  / s / Tim CouplandTim Coupland, Principal Executive OfficerApril 5, 2012/ s / Gordon SteblinGordon Steblin, Principal Accounting OfficerApril 5, 2012


---
§ 3871.5 Termination of adverse suit. ( a ) Where an adverse claim has been filed and suit thereon commenced within the statutory period and final judgment rendered determining the right of possession, it will not be sufficient to file with the authorized officer a certificate of the clerk of the court setting forth the facts as to such judgment, but the successful party must, before he is allowed to make entry, file a certified copy of the judgment roll, together with the other evidence required by R.S. 2326 (30 U.S.C. 30), and a certificate of the clerk of the court under the seal of the court showing, in accord with the record facts of the case, that the judgment mentioned and described in the judgment roll aforesaid is a final judgment; that the time for appeal therefrom has, under the law, expired, and that no such appeal has been filed, or that the defeated party has waived his right to appeal. Other evidence showing such waiver or an abandonment of the litigation may be filed.
( b ) Where such suit has been dismissed, a certificate of the clerk of the court to that effect or a certified copy of the order of dismissal will be sufficient.
( c ) After an adverse claim has been filed and suit commenced, a relinquishment or other evidence of abandonment of the adverse claim will not be accepted, but the case must be terminated and proof thereof furnished as required by the last two paragraphs.
#### Martin *v.*Martin.

September 24, 1910.

Complaint. Before Judge Ivimsey. Hall superior court. May 3, 1909.

*E. E. Dean*and *C. R. Faulkner,*for plaintiff.

*W. B. Sloan,*for defendant.

Atkinson, J.

1. On the trial of an issue involving the value in bulk of a stock of merchandise and books of account and ehoses in action, the opinions of witnesses as to value of the property were not conclusive upon the jury. *Bonds*v. *Brown,*133 *Ga.*451 (66 S. E. 156) ; *Jennings*v. *Stripling,*127 *Ga.*778 (3), (56 S. E. 1026), and cit.; *Minchew*v. *Nahunta Lumber Co.,*5 *Ga. App.*154 (62 S. E. 716).

2. Under the evidence in this ease it could not be said that the only verdict that could have been rendered was one for the plaintiff for the particular amount found in his favor.

3. This being the first grant of a new trial, the' discretion of - the trial judge in granting it will not be disturbed. *Williams*v. *Brogdon,*133 *Ga.*691 (66 S. E. 788).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
§ 2610.0-4 Responsibilities. ( a ) The authority of the Secretary of the Interior to approve the applications provided for in this part, has been delegated to the Director of the Bureau of Land Management and redelegated to State Directors of the Bureau of Land Management.
( b ) The grant contact must be signed by the Secretary of the Interior, or an officer authorized by him, and approved by the President.