alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING

20 2 2 WY 108

April Term, A.D. 20 2 2

September 8, 2022

SHAWN PIERRE FRANCIS,

Appellant

(Defendant),

v.

THE STATE OF WYOMING,

Appellee

(Plaintiff). S

- 22

- 0124



### O RDER 

### A FFIRMING THE 

### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### ’ S 

### J UDGMENT AND 

### S ENTENCE

[¶ 1 ] This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification that

A ppellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court

. Pursuant to a

plea agreement, Appellant enter ed an unconditional guilty plea to felony driving while

under the influence, a fourth or subsequent offense in ten years

. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 31

- 5

- 233

. T he district court imposed a sentence of three and one

- half to seven years

. Appellant

filed this appeal to challenge the district court’s March 9 , 20 2 2

, Judgment and Sentenc e

.

[¶2] On July 1 , 20 2 2 , Appellant’s court

- appointed appellate counsel e

- filed a Motion to

Withdraw as Counsel, pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396,

1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). T his Court subsequently entered an Order Granting Motion

for Extension of Time to File Pro Se Brief. This Court ordere d that, on or before August

22 , 20 2 2 , Appellant was permitted to file with this Court a pro se brief specifying the issues

he would like the Court to consider in this appeal. This Court also provided notice that,

after the time for filing a pro se brief expired, this Court would make its ruling on counsel’s

motion to withdraw and, if appropriate, make a final decision on th i s appeal. Appellant

did not file a pro se brief or other pleading in the time allotted.[¶3] Now, f ollowing a careful review of the record and the Anders brief submitted by

appellate counsel, this Court finds appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw should be

granted and the district court’s Judgment and Sentenc e should be a ffirmed. It is, therefore,

[¶4] ORDERED that the Wyoming Public Defender’s Office, court

- appointed counsel

for A ppellant Shawn Pierre Francis , is hereby permitted to withdraw as counsel of record

for A ppellant; and it is further

[¶ 5 ] ORDERED that the Johnson County D istrict C ourt’s March 9 , 202 2

, Judgment and

Sentenc e be , and the same h ereby is , affirmed.

[¶6] DATED this 8 th day of September

, 20 2 2

.

BY THE COURT:

/s/

KATE M

. FOX

Chief Justice
**Exhibit 13.1**

 

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code)

 

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Grupo Aeroportuario del Sureste, S.A.B. de C.V. (the “Company”), does hereby certify to his knowledge that:

 

The annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2013 (the “Form 20-F”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: April 9, 2014

 
|   | /s/   Adolfo Castro Rivas |
|--------|---------------------------|
|   | Adolfo   Castro Rivas     |
|   | Chief   Executive Officer |
|   | Chief   Financial Officer |

 

----
**KFS** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23 - 0663 STATE OF MONTANA ,

P la intiff and Appellant , v. SKYLER L. GRIEBEL ,

Defendant and Appell ee .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appell an t ’s moti on for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appell an t is granted an extension of time to and including May 31 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its opening brief.

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

April 24 2024

04/24/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0663
1 The Honorable John F. Nangle, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, sitting by designation.
2 The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-3905

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District v. * of Nebraska. * Lafayette J. Trotter, Jr. * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: May 13, 2003 Filed: May 22, 2003

___________ Before WOLLMAN and BEAM, Circuit Judges, and NANGLE, 1 District Judge.

___________ PER CURIAM. After pleading guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to deliver methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846, Lafayette Trotter, Jr., appeals the sentence imposed by the district court. 2The court increased Trotter's base offense level for possession of a firearm and for being a manager or supervisor,-2- and sentenced him to 360 months' imprisonment. Trotter argues that the district court erred in considering the government's version of the offense set forth in the Presentence Investigation Report (PSI) when increasing his offense levels. Trotter also claims the district court miscalculated his criminal history points. We disagree. We review the district court's application of the sentencing guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States v. Rohwedder , 243 F.3d 423, 435 (8th Cir. 2001). The district court's decision to credit a witness's testimony is "virtually unreviewable on appeal." United States v. Sarabia-Martinez , 276 F.3d 447, 450 (8th Cir. 2002). Trotter's claims regarding the PSI are misplaced. Trotter objected to portions of the PSI, and a sentencing hearing was conducted on the disputed portions of the report. At this hearing, the district court credited the testimony of the investigator from the county sheriff's office who had interviewed several witnesses attesting to the fact that Trotter possessed a gun during the course of activities related to the conspiracy. The same investigator testified that several people had performed tasks at Trotter's direction in furtherance of the conspiracy. The district court did not clearly err with regard to these factual findings. Nor did the district court miscalculate Trotter's criminal history points. We have reviewed the record and find no merit to Trotter's argument that the district court improperly used outdated convictions or counted the same offense twice for purposes of the criminal history calculation. We therefore affirm. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
1 

### Chappell, Regina

From: Szabo, Aaron <Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov>

Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 1:34 PM

To: Sasser, Erika

Cc: Frey, Nathan J.; Chappell, Regina; Wesson, Karen; Weatherhead, Darryl; Langdon, Robin;

Stone, Susan; Shepherd, Eloise

Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866 and 13563: Chapter 6 of the Regulatory

Impact Analysis for the Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone (RIN

2060-AP38)

Attachments: Summary of Interagency Comment s Under EO12866_13563 EPA Ozone NAAQS_RIA

....docx

Attached please find the summary of interagency comments under EO 12866 and 13563 on Chapter 6 of the Regulatory

Impact Analysis for the EPA draft final rule entitled, Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone

.

Thank you and please let Nathan Frey or me know if you have any comments or questions.

Aaron L. Szabo

Policy Analyst

Office of Management and Budget

202

‐ 395

‐ 3621

Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov2 

### Chappell, Regina

From: Szabo, Aaron <Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov>

Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 4:11 PM

To: Sasser, Erika

Cc: Frey, Nathan J.; Chappell, Regina; Wesson, Karen; Weatherhead, Darryl; Langdon, Robin;

Stone, Susan; Shepherd, Eloise

Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO 12866 and 13563: Regulatory Impact Analysis

for the Review of National Ambient Ai r Quality Standards for Ozone (RIN 2060-AP38)

Attachments: Summary of Interagency Comments Under EO12866_13563 EPA Ozone

NAAQS_RIA_Final.docx

Attached please find the summary of interagency comments under EO 12866 and 13563 on the Regulatory Impact

Analysis for the EPA draft final rule entitled, Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone

.

Thank you and please let Nathan Frey or me know if you have any comments or questions.

Aaron L. Szabo

Policy Analyst

Office of Management and Budget

202

‐ 395

‐ 3621

Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov3 

### Chappell, Regina

From: Szabo, Aaron <Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov>

Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 10:00 AM

To: Sasser, Erika

Cc: Frey, Nathan J.; Chappell, Regina; Wesson, Karen; Weatherhead, Darryl; Langdon, Robin;

Stone, Susan; Shepherd, Eloise

Subject: Summary of Interagency Comments under EO12866 and 13563: Review of National Ambient

Air Quality Standards for Ozone (RIN 2060-AP38)

Attachments: Summary of Interagency Comments Under EO12866_13563 EPA Ozone

NAAQS_Fina....docx

Attached please find the summary of interagency comments under EO 12866 and 13563 on the draft final rule and

Regulatory Impact Analysis for the EPA draft final rule entitled, Review of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for

Ozone

.

Thank you and please let Nathan Frey or me know if you have any comments or questions.

Aaron L. Szabo

Policy Analyst

Office of Management and Budget

202

‐ 395

‐ 3621

Aaron_L_Szabo@omb.eop.gov
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -           Report: Mentoring in Juvenile Treatment Drug Courts      

# Report: Mentoring in Juvenile Treatment Drug Courts

This report provides an overview of a project in which NCJFCJ visited OJJDP-funded mentoring programs at 10 juvenile treatment drug court sites and conducted a focus group to discuss youth’s strengths and challenges. 

http://www.ed.gov/blog/2015/08/a-call-for-better-methods-for-evaluating-educational-apps?utm_source=youth.gov&utm_medium=federal-links&utm_campaign=reports-and-resources
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

JOHN TOWER, 1 Petitioner Below, Appellant,

v. JANET FOWLER, Respondent Below, Appellee. §

§ No. 268, 2023 § § Court Below–Family Court § of the State of Delaware § § File No. CN14-04728 § Petition No. 22-21006 § § § Submitted: September 7, 2023 Decided: September 14, 2023

ORDER On August 2, 2023, John Tower filed an appeal from the Family Court’s July 26, 2023 letter addressing the merits of Tower’s petition for a rule to show cause. Because the Family Court docket reflected that a hearing was scheduled on the petition for the following week, the Senior Court Clerk issued a notice, sent by certified mail, to Tower to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 42 when taking an appeal from an apparent interlocutory order. The United States Postal Service information sheet indicates that the notice was sent out for delivery on August 15, 2023. On August 23, 2023, the Court resent the notice to Tower at the address he provided to the Court

1 The Court previously assigned pseudonyms to the parties under to Supreme Court Rule 7(d).2 via first-class mail. A timely response to the notice to show cause was due on or before September 6, 2023. To date, Tower has not responded to the notice to show cause. Dismissal of the appeal is therefore deemed to be unopposed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rules 3(b)(2) and 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Chief Justice
## IN THE COURT O F CRIMINA L A PPEA LS OF TEXA S NO. WR-82,443-01

EX P ARTE JERRY DALE JONES, Ap plicant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 1407048-A IN THE 178TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY
Per curiam . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Ar t i cl e 1 1
. 07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleade d guilty to posse ssion of a controlled substance weig hing more than one g ram but le ss tha n four g rams, and was sentenc ed to three y ear s’ imprisonment. He did not appea l his conviction. Applicant contends that his plea was involuntary and that his conviction violates due proce ss beca use less than a wee k afte r he enter ed his ple a, the evidenc e in his case was tested and found to weigh less than one g ram. There wer e other discrepa ncies betwee n the char g ing instrument, the pleapaper s and the judgme nt in this case with respe ct to the ty pe of controlled substance alleg ed to have been posse ssed, and whe ther or not Applica nt pleaded “ true” to an enha nceme nt alleg ation. On Dec ember

10, 2014, this Court rema nded to the t rial court to resolve the discrepa ncies in the rec ord, and to deter mine whether any err ors in the judgme nt in this case wer e cler ical err ors, subject to corr ection by way of judgme nt nunc pro tunc , or judicial err ors. The parties have enter ed agree d finding s of fact and c onclusions of law, a nd the trial cour

t has deter

mined that Applicant’s decision to plead guilty

to possessing more than one gram but less than four grams of a controlled substance in this case was not a voluntary and intelligent choice
. Applicant is entitled to relief
. Ex parte Mable , 443 S.W .3d 129 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Relief is g rante d. The judgme nt in Cause No. 1407048 in the 178th District Court of Har ris County is set aside, and Applicant is rema nded to the custody of the Sheriff of Har ris County to
answe r the char g es as set out in the information. The trial court sh al l i s s ue any nece ssary bench
war rant within 10 day s after

the mandate of this Court issues. Co p ie s o f th is o p inion shall be sent to the Texas Depa rtment of Criminal J ustice–Corr e c ti o n a l Institut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: Marc h 4, 2015 Do not publish
Exhibit 32-7

Certificate Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 United States Code

The undersigned officer hereby certifies, as to the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PECO Energy Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008, that (i) the report fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of PECO Energy
Company.



/s/    Denis P. OBrienDenis P. OBrienChief Executive Officer and President


Date: October 24, 2008



219
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-6363

RICHARD B. FULLER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

RICHARD E. BAZZLE, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Beaufort. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior 

District Judge. (9:09-cv-00348-PMD)

Submitted: May 20, 2010 Decided: May 28, 2010

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard B. Fuller, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, 

Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Richard B. Fuller seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). 

A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this 

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find 

that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district 

court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural 

ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. MillerEl v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th 

Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and 

conclude that Fuller has not made the requisite showing. 

Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss 

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                              PRESIDION CORPORATION

                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      STATE OF
              SUBSIDIARY                            INCORPORATION                  DOING BUSINESS AS
              ----------                            -------------                  -----------------
<S>                                                 <C>                        <C>
         Presidion Solutions, Inc.                     Florida                 Presidion Solutions, Inc.
         Sunshine Staff Leasing, Inc.                  Florida                 Presidion Solutions I, Inc.
         Sunshine Companies, Inc.                      Florida                 Presidion Solutions II, Inc.
         Sunshine Companies, II, Inc.                  Florida                 Presidion Solutions III,Inc.
         Sunshine Companies III, Inc.                  Florida                 Presidion Solutions IV, Inc.
         Sunshine Companies, Inc. IV                   Florida                 Presidion Solutions V, Inc.
         ABS IV, Inc.                                  Delaware                None
         Paradyme, Inc.                                Florida                 Presidion Solutions VI, Inc.
</TABLE>

Subsidiaries omitted from this list are not deemed to be significant
subsidiaries of the Registrant.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 39 (Tuesday, March 2, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12193-12194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-04296]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

[Document Identifier CMS-372(S)]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human 
Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice; withdrawal.

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

    On Thursday, February 25, 2021, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 
Services (CMS) published a 60-day notice entitled, ``Agency Information 
Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request.'' That 
notice invited public comments on the following information collection 
request: Title: Annual Report on Home and Community Based Services 
Waivers

[[Page 12194]]

and Supporting Regulations; Form Number: CMS-372(S); and OMB Control 
Number: 0938-0272. Through the publication of this document we are 
withdrawing that notice (FR document: 2021-03916) in its entirety. 
While the notice published in error, it will be resubmitted for 
publication and public comment when ready.

    Dated: February 25, 2021.
William N. Parham, III,
Director, Paperwork Reduction Staff, Office of Strategic Operations and 
Regulatory Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2021-04296 Filed 3-1-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P
EXHIBIT 32



<PAGE>


                                  CERTIFICATION

      In connection with the Annual Report of Epic Energy Resources, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Rex Doyle, the Chief
Executive and Financial Officer and the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

(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 the
            Company.



Date:  April __, 2007
                                     -----------------------------------
                                     Rex    Doyle,    Chief    Executive    and
Financial Officer














San Juan  Dec 06 10-K updated 4-17-07