alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

NO. CAAP-24-0000028

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I

STATE OF HAWAI I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.

SHAWN J. MEDEIROS, Defendant-Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT

(CASE NO. 2CPC-22-0000677)

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

(By: Leonard, Acting Chief Judge, Hiraoka and Wadsworth, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Plaintiff-Appellee State of

Hawaii's (State) April 12, 2024 Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack

of Appellate Jurisdiction, the papers in support and in

opposition, and the record, it appears the State seeks dismissal

of this appeal on the basis that the Circuit Court of the Second

Circuit's April 18, 2023 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law,

and Order Denying Defendant's Motion to Suppress Evidence (Denial

Order), from which self-represented Defendant-Appellant Shawn J.

Medeiros appeals, is not a final appealable order or judgment,

and that no exception to finality applies.

We conclude that the Denial Order is not a final

judgment and sentence appealable under Hawaii Revised Statutes

(HRS) § 641-11 (2016). The Circuit Court has not granted leave

to file an interlocutory appeal from the Denial Order under HRS

§ 641-17 (2016). No other exception to finality applies. See

State v. Johnson, 96 Hawai i 462, 470 n.12, 32 P.3d 106, 114 n.12

(App. 2001) ("[T]he collateral order exception is applicable in

criminal cases only upon a denial of pretrial motions to reduce

Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-24-0000028

05-JUL-2024

08:49 AM

Dkt. 47 OGMD
NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER

bail, motions to dismiss based on double jeopardy grounds, and

motions to dismiss under the Speech and Debate Clause.").

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is

granted, and the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are

dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai i, July 5, 2024.

/s/ Katherine G. Leonard

Acting Chief Judge

/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka

Associate Judge

/s/ Clyde J. Wadsworth

Associate Judge 

2
----

ADMINISTRATIVE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ON SOCIAL SECURITY FOR MIGRANT WORKERS

Rates for conversion of currencies pursuant to Council Regulation (EEC) No 574/72

(2005/C 277/07)

Article 107(1), (2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EEC) No 574/72

Reference period: October 2005

Application period: January, February and March 2006

----
Sacram

ento

River

T16N R2W T16N R1W

T15N R2W T15N R1W

CCOOLLUUSSAA CC OO

2 1 6 5

14

26

23

35 36

30

19

25

31

13 18

24

17

29

20

32

3

7 8

34

27

15

22

10 11 12

Colusa Trough

GCID Lateral 62-2A

Arbee

Colusa

Contract No. 14-06-200-935A-R-1

Exhibit B

Roberts Ditch Irrigation Company

725-202-43

Note: The Public Land Survey depicted here

was digitized from USGS topographic maps.

Contractor's Service Area

District Boundary

0 0.5 1

Miles

Date: November 4, 2004

File Name: N:\districts\contracts\roberts_ditch\roberts_ditch.mxd
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

Travel El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro Trail
PUBLIC LAW 108–495—DEC. 23, 2004 118 STAT. 3999

Public Law 108–495

108th Congress

An Act

To amend title 18, United States Code, to prohibit video voyeurism in the special

maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Video Voyeurism Prevention

Act of 2004’’.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF VIDEO VOYEURISM.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Title 18, United States Code, is amended

by inserting after chapter 87 the following new chapter:

‘‘CHAPTER 88—PRIVACY

‘‘Sec.

‘‘1801. Video voyeurism.

‘‘§ 1801. Video voyeurism

‘‘(a) Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction

of the United States, has the intent to capture an image of a

private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly

does so under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

‘‘(b) In this section—

‘‘(1) the term ‘capture’, with respect to an image, means

to videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, or broadcast;

‘‘(2) the term ‘broadcast’ means to electronically transmit

a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a person

or persons;

‘‘(3) the term ‘a private area of the individual’ means the

naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks,

or female breast of that individual;

‘‘(4) the term ‘female breast’ means any portion of the

female breast below the top of the areola; and

‘‘(5) the term ‘under circumstances in which that individual

has a reasonable expectation of privacy’ means—

‘‘(A) circumstances in which a reasonable person would

believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without

being concerned that an image of a private area of the

individual was being captured; or

‘‘(B) circumstances in which a reasonable person would

believe that a private area of the individual would not

18 USC 1801

note.

Video Voyeurism

Prevention Act of

2004.

Dec. 23, 2004

[S. 1301]

118 STAT. 4000 PUBLIC LAW 108–495—DEC. 23, 2004

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 1301:

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108–504 (Comm. on the Judiciary).

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:

Vol. 149 (2003): Sept. 25, considered and passed Senate.

Vol. 150 (2004): Sept. 21, considered and passed House, amended.

Dec. 7, Senate concurred in House amendment.

Æ

be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person

is in a public or private place.

‘‘(c) This section does not prohibit any lawful law enforcement,

correctional, or intelligence activity.’’.

(b) AMENDMENT TO PART ANALYSIS.—The table of chapters at

the beginning of part I of title 18, United States Code, is amended

by inserting after the item relating to chapter 87 the following

new item:

‘‘88. Privacy ........................................................................................................... 1801’’.

Approved December 23, 2004.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-22283-CIV-GAYLES/REID

CHRISTOPHER M. GORDON,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent. 

/

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate 

Judge (the “Report”) [ECF No. 5]. Petitioner filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, which 

the Court construes as a petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241, challenging his continued detention at the Metro West Detention Center following a criminal conviction in the Eleventh Judicial 

Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. [ECF No. 1]. The matter was referred to Magistrate 

Judge Reid for a ruling on all pre-trial non-dispositive matters and for a Report and Recommendation on any dispositive matters. [ECF No. 2]. Judge Reid’s Report recommends that the Court

dismiss the petition as moot as Petitioner is no longer being held at the Metro West Detention Center.1 Petitioner has failed to timely object to the Report.

A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection

is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the 

 1

 As set forth in the Report, Petitioner has also been charged in a federal criminal case in this district, United States 

v. Gordon, 19-20694-CR-MOORE. A writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum was issued to obtain the presence of 

Petitioner in federal court. On May 29, 2020, Petitioner was arraigned in federal court and held in detention pending 

trial. Petitioner is currently in custody at the Miami Federal Detention Center.

Case 1:20-cv-22283-DPG Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/19/2020 Page 1 of 2
2

party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed.

R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection 

is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint Underwriters, 

L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 

781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). 

The Court has reviewed the record and finds no clear error with Judge Reid’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that the Petition should be dismissed as moot. Accordingly, after 

careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

(1) Judge Reid’s Report [ECF No. 5] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and 

incorporated into this Order by reference;

(2) Petitioner’s Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief [ECF No. 1] is DISMISSED as 

MOOT;

(3) No certificate of appealability shall issue; and 

(4) This case shall be CLOSED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 19th day of October, 2020. 

________________________________

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-22283-DPG Document 6 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/19/2020 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.2

      Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the Securities
                              Exchange Act of 1934

I, Philip Yee, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report for the period ended March 31, 2007
of ELECTRONIC SENSOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. (the "Company");

2.   Based on my knowledge, this 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 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 Company as of,
and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.   The Company's other certifying officer 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 Company 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 Company, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company'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 Company's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.   The Company's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Company's auditors and the audit committee of Company'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 are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the Company'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 Company's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date: May 14, 2007                  /s/ Philip Yee
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Philip Yee
                                    Secretary, Treasurer and Chief Financial
                                    Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                    Officer)
### **Subchapter A—Application of Internal Revenue Laws**

Sec.
7801.
Authority of Department of the Treasury.
7802.
Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board.
7803.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue; other officials.
7804.
Other personnel.
7805.
Rules and regulations.
7806.
Construction of title.
7807.
Rules in effect upon enactment of this title.
7808.
Depositaries for collections.
7809.
Deposit of collections.
7810.
Revolving fund for redemption of real property.
7811.
Taxpayer Assistance Orders.
7812.
Streamlined critical pay authority for information technology positions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2019**—Pub. L. 116–25, title II, §2103(b), July 1, 2019, 133 Stat. 1011, added item 7812.

**1998**—Pub. L. 105–206, title I, §§1101(c)(2), 1102(e)(1), 1104(b)(2), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 697, 704, 710, added items 7802 to 7804 and struck out former items 7802 "Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Assistant Commissioners; Taxpayer Advocate", 7803 "Other personnel", and 7804 "Effect of reorganization plans".

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–168, title I, §101(b)(3), July 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 1456, added item 7802 and struck out former item 7802 "Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Assistant Commissioner (Employee Plans and Exempt Organizations)".

**1988**—Pub. L. 100–647, title VI, §6230(b), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3734, added item 7811.

**1983**—Pub. L. 97–473, title II, §202(c), Jan. 14, 1983, 96 Stat. 2610, added item for subchapter C.

**1974**—Pub. L. 93–406, title II, §1051(c), Sept. 2, 1974, 88 Stat. 951, substituted "Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Assistant Commissioner (Employee Plans and Exempt Organizations)" for "Commissioner of Internal Revenue" in item 7802.

**1966**—Pub. L. 89–719, title I, §112(c), Nov. 2, 1966, 80 Stat. 1146, added item 7810.
### §645. Certain revocable trusts treated as part of estate

#### (a) General rule

For purposes of this subtitle, if both the executor (if any) of an estate and the trustee of a qualified revocable trust elect the treatment provided in this section, such trust shall be treated and taxed as part of such estate (and not as a separate trust) for all taxable years of the estate ending after the date of the decedent's death and before the applicable date.

#### (b) Definitions

For purposes of subsection (a)—

#### (1) Qualified revocable trust

The term "qualified revocable trust" means any trust (or portion thereof) which was treated under section 676 as owned by the decedent of the estate referred to in subsection (a) by reason of a power in the grantor (determined without regard to section 672(e)).

#### (2) Applicable date

The term "applicable date" means—

(A) if no return of tax imposed by chapter 11 is required to be filed, the date which is 2 years after the date of the decedent's death, and

(B) if such a return is required to be filed, the date which is 6 months after the date of the final determination of the liability for tax imposed by chapter 11.

#### (c) Election

The election under subsection (a) shall be made not later than the time prescribed for filing the return of tax imposed by this chapter for the first taxable year of the estate (determined with regard to extensions) and, once made, shall be irrevocable.

(Added Pub. L. 105–34, title XIII, §1305(a), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 1040, §646; renumbered §645, Pub. L. 105–206, title VI, §6013(a)(1), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 819.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 645 was renumbered section 644 of this title.

#### Amendments

1998—Pub. L. 105–206 renumbered section 646 of this title as this section.

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

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 105–34, title XIII, §1305(d), Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 1041, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [enacting this section and amending section 2652 of this title] shall apply with respect to estates of decedents dying after the date of the enactment of this Act [Aug. 5, 1997]."
February 7, 2013 Post Office Box 1569 Carlsbad, NM 88221-1569 (575) 887-1191 1-800-658-2713 www.cityofcarlsbadnm.com

To Dennis J. DeVany Chief, Essential AirService Division, X-53 Office ofAviation Analysis EAS@dot.gov

Dear Mr. DeVany: ' -.**~** ·- .J DALEJANWAY MAYOR

JON R. TULLY CITYilDNfLVISTRATOR

Thank you forthe opportunityto allowthe citizens ofCarlsbad a chance to provide feedback in your recommendation to the Assistant Secretary forAviation and International Affairs regarding the Essential Air Service (EAS) contract for Carlsbad, New Mexico, beginning June 1, 2013.

We're writingto you as the Carlsbad Air Service Committee, an organization appointed by Carlsbad Mayor Dale Janway to considerthis issue. Our membership consists ofelected officials, business leaders and representatives oflocal industries forwhom air travel is essential. Our discussions on this topic were based on recognition ofourown needs, an understanding of Carlsbad's current economic situation and an evaluation ofourtown's anticipated economic growth. Business travel in this area is related to the oil industry, potash and the Department of Energy's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).

After extensive review and discussion, we're requesting that you recommend the selection of Boutique Air for the EAS contract in Carlsbad. We believe Boutique Air would best serve the residents ofCarlsbad and their business and personal interests.
Specifically, Boutique Air's service option #1 which consists of non-stop round tripsto the Albuquerque Sunport and Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport will have asignificant positive impact on travel associated with WIPP. Many ofour federal employees and contractors frequently need totravel to and from either Washington D.C. orWIPP's generator sites, and a waypoint at DFW will reduce travel time and likely lower overall costs. WIPP plays a pivotal role in the nation's nuclear cleanup effort; providingthe project with accommodatingtravel options is reasonable and beneficial to the pursuit ofthis task. We find option #3 is unacceptable to our community as many require flights to Albuquerque.

Ward 1 PAUL C. AGUILAR NICK G. ,.;].l1U\JJLUV COUNCILORSAdditionally, Boutique's offer of pressurized flights will significantly improve the comfort level ofour community's frequent travelers. We understand that it is asingle engine plane, and we are requesting atwo (2) year contract. The pressurized flights and the multiple destinations
were determiningfactors in the committee's recommendation. We were also impressed by Boutique's presentation in Carlsbad and believe the airline will put a strong emphasis on customer service and accessibility.

Our committee is indicatingthis preference based on majority consent. Thank you and the Assistant Secretary for giving our preference serious consideration.

# Sine~**WI(~~**

# ~ilor Janel! Whitlock- Committee Co-Chair

# ~::co-Chair Qaters- Comni1ttee Member

# ~Jci!**~~~mber**

1-?_J**(~,**

# ... L Paul Shoemaker- Committee Member

(Absent) Commissioner Susan Crockett- Committee Member CommissionerJack Volpato- Committee Member Ned Elkins- Committee Member
§ 428.5 Required information. ( a ) We will determine which forms you must use to submit the information required by this section.
( b ) You must declare all nonexempt land to which you provide services westwide.
( c ) You must give us other information about your compliance with Federal reclamation law, including but not limited to: ( 1 ) Identifier information, such as your name, address, telephone number;
( 2 ) If you are a legal entity, information concerning your organizational structure and part owners;
( 3 ) Information about the land to which you provide services, such as a legal description, and the number of acres;
( 4 ) Information about whether you formerly owned, as ineligible excess land or under recordable contract, the land to which you are providing services;
( 5 ) Information about the services you provide, such as what they are, who decides when they are needed, and how much control you have over the daily operation of the land;
( 6 ) If you provide different services to different land parcels, a list of services that you provide to each parcel;
( 7 ) Whether you can use your agreement with a landholder as collateral in any loan;
( 8 ) Whether you can sue or be sued in the name of the landholding; and
( 9 ) Whether you are authorized to apply for any Federal assistance from the United States Department of Agriculture in the name of the landholding.
M&I 2007 Sch B-3B F.Z11.xls

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

SCHEDULE OF M&I VOLUNTARY PAYMENTS TO BE APPLIED IN FY 2008 ACCOUNTING

(REFLECTED IN 2009 DEFICIT/CAPITAL COSTS)

Date Voluntary Payments

Facility/Contractor Payments Received Deficit Capital 

Contra Costa Canal

Contra Costa WD 148,335.00 $ 10/31/2007 - 148,335.00 $ 

$ 

Folsom D & R

City of Roseville 66,490.79 8/25/2008 66,490.79 $ 

$ 

City of Roseville 6,182.00 2/ 6,182.00 

$ 72,672.79 72,672.79 $ - $ 

$ 

Folsom South Canal

East Bay MUD 520,281.28 $ 11/05/2007 520,281.28 $ - 

$ 

East Bay MUD 520,909.86 9/29/2008 520,909.86 

$ 1,041,191.14 1,041,191.14 $ 1

$ 

Spring Creek Conduit

Shasta CSD 774.57 $ 11/05/2007 774.57 $ - 

$ 

Toyon Pipeline

City of Shasta Lake 17,821.64 $ 1/ 17,821.54 $ - 

$ 

City of Shasta Lake 1,551.90 2/ 1,551.90 - 

$ 19,373.44 19,373.54 $ - 

$ 

Total $ 1,134,011.94 1,282,347.04 $ 148,335.00 $ 1

$ 

1/ Applied the amount over actual costs shown on the 2007 annual accounting analysis 2/ Applied the revenue over obligation shown on the 2007 annual accounting analysis 

10/21/2008