alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v William Brown, Appellant.

[775 NYS2d 877]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Dickerson, J.), rendered July 8, 2003, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

*536Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Gray,*86 NY2d 10 [1995]; *People v Udzinski,*146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he received the effective assistance of counsel *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708 [1998]; *People v Satterfield,*66 NY2d 796 [1985]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137 [1981]; *People v Wicker,*229 AD2d 602 [1996]; *People v Sullivan,*153 AD2d 223 [1990]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., H. Miller, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, September 29, 2020.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, September 29, 2020

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A21A0332. KERRY MITCHELL v. THE STATE.

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW 

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion the hereby GRANTED, and 

jurisdiction is released back to the trial court upon receipt of this order.
J~~SED STqr~S 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

ii Uj 

o Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

0 

~~T-it PROSEG~\ 

OFFICE OF 

SOLID WASTE AND 

EMERGENCY RESPONSE 

The Honorable Dan Boren 

U.S . House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C . 20515 

Dear Congressman Boren: 

Thank you for your letter of September 21, 2009, forwarding Mr. Bob Bivens' letter 

regarding the U.S . Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) upcoming rules that will be 

published in response to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the Commercial and 

Industrial Solid Waste Incineration (CISWI) case and EPA's approach toward the use of whole 

scrap tires. 

Mr. Bivens expresses specific concerns that whole scrap tires would be excluded from the 

definition of solid waste only after they are processed . Scrap tires are one of many materials 

under evaluation . EPA continues to research and gather additional information for these 

materials so that potential options can be presented for comment. Currently, EPA is under a 

court ordered schedule for proposing, under the Clean Air Act, the CISWI rule and the Industrial, 

Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heater rule by April 2010 and for issuing final 

rules by December 2010. I appreciate Mr. Bivens' concerns and will ensure that his letter is 

entered into the rulemaking docket (EPA-HQ-RCRA-2008-0329) for consideration as the 

definition of solid waste rule is developed. 

Again, thank you for your letter . If you have further questions, please contact me or your 

staff may call Amy Hayden in EPA's Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations 

at (202) 564-0555 . 

OCT 3 0 2009 

Stanislks 

Assistant Administrator 

Internet Address (URL) * http ://www .epa .gov 

Recycled/Recyclable * Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper
Exhibit32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of JuniperPartners Acquisition Corp. (the‘‘Company’’) on Form 10-QSB for the periodending September  30,  2006 (the‘‘Report’’), as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Stuart B. Rekant,Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

1.        The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended; and

2.        The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of theCompany.

|        |  |  |                                                                                              |  |  |                          |
|--------|--|--|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--------------------------|
| By:    |  |  | /s/Stuart B. Rekant                                                                          |  |  | Dated: November  13,2006 |
|   |  |  | Stuart B. RekantChairman of theBoard and Chief Executive Officer(Principal ExecutiveOfficer) |  |  |                     |
|        |

----
#### 9904.402-63 Effective date.

This Standard is effective as of April 17, 1992.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION

Cause number: 01

- 1 9

- 0 0 018

- C V

Style: Lucrecia Mendia v. Fiesta Mart

, L.L.C.

Date motion filed * : May 30 , 201 9

Type of motion: Response to the Court’s Notice of Late Brief and Request f o r a Late

Record Notice

Party filing motion: Appellant ’s c ounsel Tina Z. Robbins

Document to be filed: Appellant’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? No

.

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: March 27

, 201 9

Number of extensions granted: 2 Current Due D ate: May 16 , 2019

Date Requested: N/A ( 1 0 days after filing of supplemental clerk’s

record)

Ordered that motion is:

☒ Granted , in part

If document is to be filed, document due: June 1 7 , 201 9

.  Denied

 Dismissed ( e.g. , want of jurisdiction, moot)

☒ Other:

_ The district clerk filed a supplemental clerk’s record on June 4, 2019

.

__ Accordingly, appellant’s response to the Court’s notice of late brief and request for a late

record notice, construed as a third m otion for an extension of time to file her brief ten days

after the filing of the supplemental clerk’s record, is granted , in part, until June 17

, 2019.

__

Judge’ s signature:

__

/s/ Laura C. Higley

_______

x Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: __ June 6, 2019

___
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

            -           2014 Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools Awards      

# 2014 Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools Awards

Forty-eight schools were honored as 2014 Green Ribbon Schools for their exemplary efforts to reduce environmental impact and utility costs, promote better health, and ensure effective environmental education, including civics and green career pathways. In addition, nine districts were honored for the District Sustainability Award. 

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/green-ribbon-schools/highlights-2014.doc?utm_source=FindYouthInfo.gov&utm_medium=Federal%20links&utm_campaign=Reports-and-Resources
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 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

            -           Database for Finding Better Schools      

# Database for Finding Better Schools

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has partnered with GreatSchools, a national nonprofit educational resource for parents, to provide an online database that can assist parents in choosing a school for their child. The database contains more than 200,000 public, charter, magnet, and private schools, serving grades K-12 across the country.

http://www.greatschools.org/find-schools/
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

            -           Videos and Animated GIF About Labels Bring the Words of Teens to Life      

# Videos and Animated GIF About Labels Bring the Words of Teens to Life

StopBullying.gov launched two new videos, Labels Don't Define You and Labels Don't Define You 2, and an animated GIF that address the issue of labels and how words can be harmful. This project is a result of regular engagement and collaboration with one of the main audiences for StopBullying.gov: teens. Spread the word by sharing one or all of these animated pieces with your audiences.

http://www.stopbullying.gov/blog/2014/05/20/new-label-videos-and-animated-gif-bring-words-teens-life?utm_source=FindYouthInfo.gov&utm_medium=Federal%20links&utm_campaign=Reports-and-Resources
#### § 1205.314 Cotton-producing State.

*Cotton-producing State* means each of the following States and combination of States: Alabama; Arizona; Arkansas; California-Nevada; Florida; Georgia; Kansas; Louisiana; Mississippi; Missouri-Illinois; New Mexico; North Carolina; Oklahoma; South Carolina; Tennessee-Kentucky; Texas; Virginia.

[75 FR 24374, May 5, 2010]
#### *Johnsons vs. Williams.*

Petition, &c

tlhse Í29.'

Error to the Boone Circuit; H. O. Brown, Judge.

*failure of consideration. Rale of interest in another state. Jury.*

June 13.

Plea, failure óf considera*490tion, must shew tbe ■whole consideratio had faile

*489Judge Robertson,

delivered the opinion of the Court.

The plea impeaching the consideration is insufficient; It does not show a *total failure.*

*490The rate of interest in another state, is a fact, which must be found by a

*Triplett, tor*plaintiff; *Marshall,*for defendants.

But the court erred in rendering judgment *for*interest on the note, without a jury to ascertain the amount. The note is executed in Cincinnati. Without deciding whether, judicially, the court can know that there is noplace in Kentucky called Cincinnati, it is sufficient in this case that the piea states, tbat the note was executed in consideration of pork sold *“at Cincinnati, in the state of Ohio.”*The demurrer to this plea admits this allegation. It does not necessarily result that the note was executed in the state of Ohio. But we hate no doubt, from the foregoing facts, that it was. The rate of interest in Ohio, is a fact which must be ascertained by a jury, on proof.

Wherefore, for this error alone, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded for further proceed-; ing’s, according to' this opinion.
#### 52.227-10 Filing of Patent Applications—Classified Subject Matter.

As prescribed at 27.203-2, insert the following clause:

# Filing of Patent Applications—Classified Subject Matter (DEC 2007)

(a) Before filing or causing to be filed a patent application in the United States disclosing any subject matter of this contract classified *Secret* or higher, the Contractor shall, citing the 30-day provision below, transmit the proposed application to the Contracting Officer. The Government shall determine whether, for reasons of national security, the application should be placed under an order of secrecy, sealed in accordance with the provision of 35 U.S.C. 181-188, or the issuance of a patent otherwise delayed under pertinent United States statutes or regulations. The Contractor shall observe any instructions of the Contracting Officer regarding the manner of delivery of the patent application to the United States Patent Office, but the Contractor shall not be denied the right to file the application. If the Contracting Officer shall not have given any such instructions within 30 days from the date of mailing or other transmittal of the proposed application, the Contractor may file the application.

(b) Before filing a patent application in the United States disclosing any subject matter of this contract classified *Confidential,* the Contractor shall furnish to the Contracting Officer a copy of the application for Government determination whether, for reasons of national security, the application should be placed under an order of secrecy or the issuance of a patent should be otherwise delayed under pertinent United States statutes or regulations.

(c) Where the subject matter of this contract is classified for reasons of security, the Contractor shall not file, or cause to be filed, in any country other than in the United States as provided in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this clause, an application or registration for a patent containing any of the subject matter of this contract without first obtaining written approval of the Contracting Officer.

(d) When filing any patent application coming within the scope of this clause, the Contractor shall observe all applicable security regulations covering the transmission of classified subject matter and shall promptly furnish to the Contracting Officer the serial number, filing date, and name of the country of any such application. When transmitting the application to the United States Patent Office, the Contractor shall by separate letter identify by agency and number the contract or contracts that require security classification markings to be placed on the application.

(e) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (e), in all subcontracts that cover or are likely to cover classified subject matter.

(End of clause)

[49 FR 12988, Mar. 30, 1984, as amended at 72 FR 63066, Nov. 7, 2007]
##### 



Exhibit 32-8

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 Exelon Generation
Company, LLC for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2004, 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 Exelon
Generation Company, LLC.

|                       |  |                                                                                                             
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: October 27, 2004 |  | /s/ J. BARRY MITCHELL

    J. Barry MitchellSenior Vice President, Treasurer and
    Chief Financial Officer
#### § 1209.280 OMB control numbers.

The control number assigned to the information collection requirements by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* is OMB control number 0581-0093, except for the Council nominee background statement form which is assigned OMB control number 0505-0001.
#### § 1205.312 Handle.

*Handle* means to harvest, gin, warehouse, compress, purchase, market, transport, or otherwise acquire ownership or control of cotton.

[31 FR 16758, Dec. 31, 1966. Redesignated at 56 FR 64472, Dec. 10, 1991]
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 1, 2018

NO. 03

- 18

- 00207

- CR

Ex p arte Scott Ogle

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF HAYS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PE MBERTON, AND BOURLAN D

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the order denying the application for writ of habeas corpus sign ed by the

trial court. Having r eviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there

was no reversible error in the order . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s order denying

the application for writ of habeas corpus

. A ppellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal,

both in this Court and the court below.

### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 1, 2018

NO. 03

- 18

- 0020 8

- CR

Ex p arte Scott Ogle

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF HAYS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PE MBERTON, AND BOURLAN D

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE PURYEAR

This is an appeal from the order denying the application for writ of habeas corpus sign ed by the

trial court. Having r eviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there

was no reversible error in the order . Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s order denying

the application for writ of habeas corpus

. A ppellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal,

both in this Court and the court below.
#### 970.2671 Diversity.
#### Alisa Lifshitz et al., Respondents-Appellants, v Beth Israel Medical Center-Kings Highway Division, Defendant, and August A. Feola, Appellant, and Angelo R. Rubano et al., Respondents.

[776 NYS2d 907]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, the defendant August A. Feola appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated July 23, 2003, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, and the plaintiffs cross-appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of the same order as granted the separate motions of the defendants Angelo R. Rubano and Martin Rosen which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, the motion of the defendant August A. Feola is granted, and the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against him; and it is further,

*760Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as cross-appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants August A. Feola, Angelo R Rubano, and Martin Rosen, payable by the plaintiffs.

In support of their separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, the defendants August A. Feola, Angelo R. Rubano, and Martin Rosen (hereinafter the defendants) made a prima facie showing of their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law *(see O’Shaughnessy v Hines,*248 AD2d 687, 688 [1998]). The burden then shifted to the plaintiffs to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact by submitting an expert’s affidavit attesting to a departure from accepted practice and containing an opinion that the defendants’ acts or omissions were a competent producing cause of the death of Aaron Lifshitz *(see Domaradzki v Glen Cove Ob/Gyn Assoc.,*242 AD2d 282 [1997]). The conclusory affidavit of the plaintiffs’ medical expert failed to demonstrate that the alleged departure of the defendants was the proximate cause of the death. This was insufficient to defeat summary judgment *(see Kaplan v Hamilton Med. Assoc.,*262 AD2d 609 [1999]). Smith, J.P., S. Miller, Crane and Rivera, JJ., concur.