alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-10797

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ELIZZ GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:09-CR-30-1

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Defendant-Appellant Elizz Garcia appeals the sentence imposed following

her guilty-plea conviction for possession of stolen mail matter, in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 1708. Garcia asserts that the district court erred when it ordered her

federal sentence to run consecutively to a not-yet-imposed state sentence. The

government filed motions to supplement the record on appeal and for summary

affirmance. We GRANT the motion to supplement the record on appeal.

Because Garcia’s challenge is foreclosed by our prior precedent, we GRANT the

motion for summary affirmance, and we AFFIRM the district court’s judgment.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 8, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 09-10797 Document: 00511287186 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/08/2010
No. 09-10797

See United States v. Brown, 920 F.2d 1212 (5th Cir. 1991), abrogated on other

grounds by United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d 468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006).

2

Case: 09-10797 Document: 00511287186 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/08/2010
#### Natalie Walters, Appellant, v Government Employees Insurance Co., Respondent.

In a proceeding to confirm an arbitration award relating to no-fault benefits, the claimant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 29, 1978, which denied the application and vacated the award. Judgment affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The claimant was injured when she fell while getting out of bed inside a tent trailer which was parked in a campground. At the time, the trailer was allegedly still attached to the insured motor vehicle. Special Term properly held that there is no rational basis for the arbitrator’s conclusion that this accident arose out of the "use or operation” of a motor vehicle (cf. *Reisinger v Allstate Ins. Co.,*58 AD2d 1028, affd 44 NY2d 881; *McConnell v Fireman’s Fund Amer. Ins. Co.,*49 AD2d 676). Martuscello, J. P., Titone, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

June 5, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00344

- CV

IN RE MURPHY EXPLORA TION & PRODUCTION CO MPANY , et al.

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

On May 23, 2019, r elators filed a petition for writ of mandamus and an emergency motion to stay the trial court proceedings. After considering the petition and the record, this court concludes relators are not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for w rit of

mandamus is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.8(a). Relators’ motion to stay is DENIED AS

MOOT.

It is so ORDERED on June 5, 2019

.

_____________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 5th day of June, 2019

.

_____________________________ Keith E. Hottle, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 15

- 03

- 54356

- CV, styled Garrett Waites v. Murphy Exploration & Production Co. d/b/a Murphy Exploration & Production, et al. , pending in the 7 9th Judicial District Court, Jim Wells County, Texas, the Honorable Richard C. Terrell presiding.
NUMBER 13-18-00132-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG 

CRISTOBAL GARCIA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 36th District Court 

of San Patricio County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Valdez

Appellant Cristobal Garcia attempts to appeal his conviction for aggravated sexual 

assault of a child in cause number S-17-3337CR in the 36th District Court of San Patricio 

County, Texas. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.021(a)(2)(B) (West, Westlaw through 

2017 1st C.S.). On initial submission to this Court, the trial court’s certification was 
unclear and we abated and remanded this cause to the trial court for re-certification of the 

appellant’s right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 34.5(c), 44.3, 44.4. The trial court has 

subsequently certified that this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right 

of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).

On May 22, 2018, this Court notified appellant’s counsel of the trial court’s 

certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether 

appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings 

as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the 

existence of any amended certification. On June 13, 2018, counsel filed a response 

seeking the right to appeal in this case. Counsel’s response does not establish that the 

certification currently on file with this Court is incorrect or that appellant otherwise has a 

right to appeal.

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed 

if the trial court’s certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is 

DISMISSED. We note that appellant’s appeal from trial court cause number S-17-

3338CR in the 36th District Court of San Patricio County, Texas remains pending in our 

appellate cause number 13-18-00133-CR. 

/s/ Rogelio Valdez

ROGELIO VALDEZ

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed this

28th day of June, 2018
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert Vanderbilt Williams, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered July 24, 1963 on his plea of guilty, convicting him of attempted robbery in the third degree, and imposing sentence upon him as a second felony offender. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts; defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty and to substitute a plea of not guilty to the indictment granted; and action remanded for trial. At the time of sentence, but before sentence was pronounced, defendant protested his innocence and moved to withdraw his prior plea of guilty. Under all the circumstances here disclosed, and in the absence of any claim of prejudice by the People, we are of the opinion that the denial of the application constituted an improvident exercise of discretion. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 150 (Monday, August 5, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47274-47275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18805]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Minnesota Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission), and 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), that a meeting of the 
Minnesota Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene by 
conference call at 12:00 p.m. CST and adjourn at 1:00 p.m. CST on 
August 15, 2013. The purpose of the meeting is to allow Committee 
members the opportunity to discuss and vote on the Committee's report 
regarding unemployment disparities in Minnesota. The meeting will also 
include an orientation to new members of the Committee.
    This meeting is available to the public through the following toll-
free call-in number: 888-359-3627, conference ID: 9988503. Any 
interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the 
meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate 
over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred 
charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over 
land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with 
hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling 
the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-977-8339 and providing the Service 
with the conference call number and conference ID number.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the regional office by September 3, 2013. 
The address is U.S. Commission on

[[Page 47275]]

Civil Rights, Midwestern Regional Office, 55 W Monroe St., Suite 410, 
Chicago, IL 60603. Comments may be emailed to callen@usccr.gov. Records 
generated by this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the 
Midwestern Regional Office, as they become available, both before and 
after the meeting, and they will be uploaded onto the database at 
www.facadatabase.gov. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Midwestern Regional Office at the 
above email or street address.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated in Chicago, IL, July 31, 2013.
David Mussatt,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2013-18805 Filed 8-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
| **Signatures**                                                |   | **Title**                                                                       |   | **Date**                                 |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------|
|                   GEOFFREY                P. TALBOT |   |   Chairman,                CEO, President and Chief Financial Officer |   |   July                16, 2007 |
|                                                          |   |                                                                            |   |                                     |
|  PETER                J. UPFOLD                          |   |  Vice                Chairman, CTO and Treasurer/Secretary                 |   |  July                16, 2007       |
|                                                          |   |                                                                            |   |                                     |
|  LEONARD                SILVERMAN, Ph.D.                 |   |  Director                                                                  |   |  July                16, 2007       |
|                                                          |   |                                                                            |   |                                     |
|  ROBERT                B. FIELDS                         |   |  Director                                                                  |   |  July                16, 2007       |

----
#### 1522.804 Affirmative action programs.
### §1283. Hospital treatment of alien crewmen afflicted with certain diseases

An alien crewman, including an alien crewman ineligible for a conditional permit to land under section 1282(a) of this title, who is found on arrival in a port of the United States to be afflicted with any of the disabilities or diseases mentioned in section 1285 of this title, shall be placed in a hospital designated by the immigration officer in charge at the port of arrival and treated, all expenses connected therewith, including burial in the event of death, to be borne by the owner, agent, consignee, commanding officer, or master of the vessel or aircraft, and not to be deducted from the crewman's wages. No such vessel or aircraft shall be granted clearance until such expenses are paid, or their payment appropriately guaranteed, and the collector of customs is so notified by the immigration officer in charge. An alien crewman suspected of being afflicted with any such disability or disease may be removed from the vessel or aircraft on which he arrived to an immigration station, or other appropriate place, for such observation as will enable the examining surgeons to determine definitely whether or not he is so afflicted, all expenses connected therewith to be borne in the manner hereinbefore prescribed. In cases in which it appears to the satisfaction of the immigration officer in charge that it will not be possible within a reasonable time to effect a cure, the return of the alien crewman shall be enforced on, or at the expense of, the transportation line on which he came, upon such conditions as the Attorney General shall prescribe, to insure that the alien shall be properly cared for and protected, and that the spread of contagion shall be guarded against.

(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title II, ch. 6, §253, 66 Stat. 221.)

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

#### Abolition of Immigration and Naturalization Service and Transfer of Functions

For abolition of Immigration and Naturalization Service, transfer of functions, and treatment of related references, see note set out under section 1551 of this title.
13.302-4 Termination or cancellation of purchase orders. ( a ) If a purchase order that has been accepted in writing by the contractor is to be terminated, the contracting officer shall process the termination in accordance with— ( 1 ) 12.403 and 52.212-4(l) or (m) for commercial products and commercial services; or
( 2 ) Part 49 or 52.213-4 for other than commercial products and commercial services.
( b ) If a purchase order that has not been accepted in writing by the contractor is to be canceled, the contracting officer shall notify the contractor in writing that the purchase order has been canceled, request the contractor's written acceptance of the cancellation, and proceed as follows: ( 1 ) If the contractor accepts the cancellation and does not claim that costs were incurred as a result of beginning performance under the purchase order, no further action is required (*i.e.,* the purchase order shall be considered canceled).
( 2 ) If the contractor does not accept the cancellation or claims that costs were incurred as a result of beginning performance under the purchase order, the contracting officer shall process the action as a termination prescribed in paragraph (a) of this subsection.
[62 FR 64917, Dec. 9, 1997, as amended at 72 FR 13586, Mar. 22, 2007; 86 FR 61025, Nov. 4, 2021]
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 15, 2018

NO. 03-17-00807-CR

Christopher Lynn Newberry, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES FIELD AND TOTH

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of conviction. Because 

appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
**Student Loan Program Negotiating Committee**

**2011-2012**

2/2/2012
**Certification of Eligibility for Federal Assistance in Certain Programs**

I understand that 34 C.F.R. 75.60, 75.61, and 75.62 require that I make specific certifications of eligibility to the U.S. Department of Education (ED) as a condition of applying for Federal funds in certain programs and that these requirements are in addition to any other eligibility requirements that ED imposes under program regulations. Under 34 C.F.R. 75.60 – 75.62:

I. I certify that:

A. I do not owe a debt, or I am current in repaying a debt, or I am not in default (as that term is used at 34 C.F.R. Part 668) on a debt:

1. To the Federal Government under a nonprocurement transaction (e.g., a previous loan, scholarship, grant, or cooperative agreement); or

2. For a fellowship, scholarship, stipend, discretionary grant, or loan in any program of ED that is subject to 34 C.F.R. 75.60, 75.61, and 75.62. 

**OR**

B. I have made arrangements satisfactory to ED to repay a debt as described in A.1. or A.2. (above) on which I had not been current in repaying or on which I was in default (as that term is used in 34 CFR Part 668).

II. I certify also that I have not been declared by a judge, as a condition of sentencing under section 5301 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 862), ineligible to receive Federal assistance for the period of this requested funding.

I understand that providing a false certification to any of the statements above makes me liable for repayment to ED for funds received on the basis of this certification, for civil penalties, and for criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 1001.

(Signature)	(Date)

(Typed or Printed Name)

Name or number of ED program under which this certification is being made: 

ED 80-0016 (Revised 04/2020)

# image1.png
#### UNITED PRESS v. A. S. ABELL CO. et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 13, 1903.)

Action by the United Press against the A. S. Abell Company and others. From an order vacating an attachment, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

William C. Davis, for appellant.

Henry T. Fay, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the opinion in United Press v. A. S. Abell Co. et al. (decided herewith) 84 N. Y. Supp. 425, the order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
### SUBCHAPTER II—IMMIGRATION SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
EXHIBIT 18.1

August 27,
2009

Board
of Directors
International Rectifier Corporation

Dear
Sirs:

Note 1
of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of International Rectifier Corporation and Subsidiaries included in their Form 10-K for the year ended
June 28, 2009 describes a change in the method of accounting for patent application and related costs from capitalizing and amortizing such costs on a straight-line basis over the
estimated economic life of the underlying technologies to expensing such costs as incurred. There are no authoritative criteria for determining a 'preferable' method to account for patent application
and related costs based on the particular circumstances; however, we conclude that such change in the method of accounting is to an acceptable alternative method which, based on your business judgment
to make this change and for the stated reasons, is preferable in your circumstances.

Very truly yours,/s/ Ernst & Young LLP


---



QuickLinks
#### § 750.29 Investigation and examination.

Subpart A of this part requires an investigation for every incident that may result in a claim against or in favor of the United States. Where a previously unanticipated claim is filed against the Government and an investigation has not already been conducted, the appropriate claims officer shall immediately request an investigation. See subpart A of this part for specific action required by an adjudicating authority.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-16-00337-CV

IN RE CHARLES CLEVELAND 

NOWDEN

RELATOR

----------

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

TRIAL COURT NO. D432-E-10058-13

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of 

the opinion that relief should be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus is denied.

/s/ Bonnie Sudderth

BONNIE SUDDERTH

JUSTICE

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and SUDDERTH, JJ.

DELIVERED: September 29, 2016

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department **1378 CAF 11-02269**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF AMBER S.C.
-------------------------------------- CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER SERVICES, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT; DAVID C., JR., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 4.)
PATRICIA M. MCGRATH, LOCKPORT, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. BARBARA L. WIDRIG, MAYVILLE, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. ROBERT W. SCHNIZLER, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, JAMESTOWN, FOR AMBER S.C. Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Chautauqua County (Judith S. Claire, J.), entered October 20, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384-b. The order, among other things, adjudged that respondent David C., Jr. permanently neglected the subject child, Amber S.C. and transferred custody and guardianship of the subject child to petitioner. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Same Memorandum as in Matter of Emerald L.C. (___ AD3d ___ [Dec. 21, 2012]).

Entered: December 21, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Exhibit Q  

Part 1

Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 1 of 38 PageID #:5441
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 2 of 38 PageID #:5442
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 3 of 38 PageID #:5443
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 4 of 38 PageID #:5444
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 5 of 38 PageID #:5445
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 6 of 38 PageID #:5446
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 7 of 38 PageID #:5447
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 8 of 38 PageID #:5448
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 9 of 38 PageID #:5449
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 10 of 38 PageID #:5450
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 11 of 38 PageID #:5451
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 12 of 38 PageID #:5452
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 13 of 38 PageID #:5453
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 14 of 38 PageID #:5454
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 15 of 38 PageID #:5455
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 16 of 38 PageID #:5456
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 17 of 38 PageID #:5457
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 18 of 38 PageID #:5458
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 19 of 38 PageID #:5459
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 20 of 38 PageID #:5460
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 21 of 38 PageID #:5461
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 22 of 38 PageID #:5462
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 23 of 38 PageID #:5463
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 24 of 38 PageID #:5464
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 25 of 38 PageID #:5465
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 26 of 38 PageID #:5466
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 27 of 38 PageID #:5467
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 28 of 38 PageID #:5468
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 29 of 38 PageID #:5469
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 30 of 38 PageID #:5470
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 31 of 38 PageID #:5471
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 32 of 38 PageID #:5472
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 33 of 38 PageID #:5473
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 34 of 38 PageID #:5474
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 35 of 38 PageID #:5475
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 36 of 38 PageID #:5476
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 37 of 38 PageID #:5477
Case: 1:11-cv-09308 Document #: 198-17 Filed: 04/09/12 Page 38 of 38 PageID #:5478