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

[814 NYS2d 358]

Rose, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Main, Jr., J.), rendered February 14, 2005 in Franklin County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to the crime of attempted burglary in the second degree for which he was sentenced to, among other things, a term of incarceration of 2 Vs years and three years of postrelease supervision. On this appeal, defendant’s only contention is that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his attorney was unfamiliar with the sentencing provisions for a class D violent felony, and further, he failed to advise Supreme Court that a shorter period of postrelease supervision was authorized.

Defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is unpreserved for our review because he did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction *(see People v Flood,*16 AD3d 772 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 788 [2005]; *People v Scott,*12 AD3d 716, 717 [2004]). Were we to consider this claim, however, we would find it to be without merit. Defendant was indicted for several crimes, the highest of which was burglary in the first degree, a class B violent felony which exposed him to a potential term of incarceration of 25 years *(see*Penal Law § 70.02 [1] [a]; [3] [a]; § 140.30 [2]). Counsel ultimately negotiated a plea to attempted burglary in the second degree, a class D violent felony *(see*Penal Law § 70.02 [1] [c]; §§ 110.00, 140.25 [1] [b]), in satisfaction of the indictment, with a commitment from the District Attorney to recommend a split sentence of six months of local incarceration and five years of probation. In addition to participating in several court conferences to negotiate the plea agreement, counsel secured defendant’s release on bail, filed a demand for discovery and a bill of particulars, and made appropriate pretrial motions. Supreme Court’s statements regarding the three-year period of postrelease supervision did not, in our view, require comment or correction by counsel. In sum, and notwithstanding some confusion regarding the pos*1035sible terms of incarceration by both the Assistant District Attorney and defense counsel at an earlier court conference, defendant “receive[d] an advantageous plea and nothing in the record casts doubt on the apparent effectiveness of counsel” *(People v Ford,*86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]; *see People v Scott, supra*at 717-718).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Subpart 1545.1 - General

Parent topic: PART 1545 - GOVERNMENT PROPERTY

1545.107 Government property clauses.

(a) The Contracting Officer shall insert the contract clause at 1552.245-70:

(1) When it is anticipated that a Contractor will use Government-furnished or Contractor-acquired

property in the cleanup of hazardous material as defined in Federal Standard No. 313, or, the toxic

chemicals listed 40 CFR 372.65, in the environment.

(2) In all cost-type solicitations and contracts regardless of whether Government Property is initially

provided, and in all fixed-price solicitations and contracts whenever Government furnished property

is provided.

(b) The Contracting Officer shall insert the contract clause at 1552.245-71, Government-Furnished

Data, in any contract in which the Government is to furnish data to the Contractor. The data to be

provided shall be identified in the clause.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DONNA L. EARLY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cv-727-WKW

)

RHEEM MANUFACTURING )

COMPANY, a corporation and CAL )

MEARS, an individual, )

)

Defendants. )

BRIEFING ORDER

Upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 17) filed on

May 25, 2007, it is ORDERED that the motion be submitted without oral argument on June 29,

2007.

It is further ORDERED that plaintiff file a response which shall include a brief on or

before June 22, 2007. The Defendants may file a reply brief on or before June 29, 2007.

All future motions to remand, motions to dismiss, motions for judgment on the pleadings,

and motions for summary judgment filed in this case, it is ORDERED that:

1. The movant shall file its brief and any evidentiary submission simultaneously with

the filing of the dispositive motion.

2. The opponent’s response brief and any evidentiary submission shall be due 21 days

after the date the motion is filed.

3. The movant’s reply brief, if any, shall be due 14 days after the date the response

is filed.

Case 2:06-cv-00727-WKW-CSC Document 18 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 2
4. The motion shall be under submission on the due date of the reply brief. Unless the

court determines that a hearing is necessary or helpful, at which time a date will be set, the court will

determine the motion without oral argument upon submission. 

5. Briefs in support of or in opposition to any motion generally should not exceed

25 pages. In all cases in which briefs exceed 25 pages, counsel must include a table of contents

indicating the main sections of the brief, the principal arguments and citations to authority made in

each section, and the pages on which each section and any sub-sections may be found.

6. The parties are required to submit or mail a paper courtesy copy of briefs and

supporting evidence to the Chambers of the undersigned. 

7. For those submissions (including briefs and evidentiary materials) that exceed 25

pages, the paper courtesy copy shall be bound in a three-ring binder and tabbed.

8. Any discussion of evidence in a brief must include the specific reference, by name

or document number and by page and line, to where the evidence can be found in the supporting

evidentiary submission or in any document filed with the court.

9. Failure to comply strictly with this Order for all future filings may result in the

striking of the filing or other appropriate sanctions.

DONE this 1st day of June, 2007.

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00727-WKW-CSC Document 18 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           155,492
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 190,818
<CASH>                                          27,312
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         572,979
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,261,378
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                130,101
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                       13,680,240
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                282,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,600
<OTHER-SE>                                     285,163
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,261,378
<PREMIUMS>                                          27
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                              9,423
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               (164)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 246,366
<BENEFITS>                                       4,645
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     44,703
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           138,513
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 56,842
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (20,150)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             36,692
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    36,692
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

vs. ) Case No. 2:06CR196-MHT

)

NESTOR AMAIQUEMA -MACIAS )

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ORDER

A pretrial conference was held on September 25, 2006 before the undersigned

Magistrate Judge. Present at this conference was the Honorable Donnie Bethel, counsel

for the defendant, and Assistant United States Attorney Karl David Cooke, Jr., counsel

for the government. As a result of the conference, it is

ORDERED as follows:

1. Jury selection is set for October 30, 2006. The trial of this case is set for the

trial term commencing on October 30, 2006 before United States District Judge Myron

H. Thompson and is expected to last two (2) trial days.

2. There are no motions currently pending.

3. Proposed voir dire questions shall be filed on or before October 23, 2006.

Counsel should not include questions seeking information which is provided in the jury

questionnaire.

4. All Motions in Limine shall be filed on or before October 23, 2006. Motions in

Limine must be accompanied by a brief. Failure to file a brief will result in denial of the

motion.

Case 2:06-cr-00196-MHT-CSC Document 13 Filed 09/26/2006 Page 1 of 2
5. Proposed jury instructions shall be filed on or before October 23, 2006.

6. The court will not consider a plea pursuant to Rule 11(c) (1)(A) or (C) unless

notice is filed on or before noon on October18, 2006. The government and defendant

are informed that if a defendant waits until the last minute to enter a plea, and if that plea,

for whatever reason, is not accepted by the court, the defendant and the government will

be expected to be prepared to go to trial on October 30, 2006. The court will not

continue the trial of this case as to any defendant because a defendant’s plea was not

accepted. In other words, the defendant and the government should not wait until the last

minute for a defendant to enter a guilty plea, and both the defendant and the government

should all be ready to go to trial on October 30, 2006, as to all defendants, even though a

particular guilty plea was not accepted by the court.

Done this 26 day of September, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00196-MHT-CSC Document 13 Filed 09/26/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### BREVOORT REAL ESTATE CO v. KINGSTON et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 20, 1906)

Action by the Brevoort Real Estate Company against John Kingston and others. H. Stoddard, for appellants Nobel and others, F. 211. A very, for respondent Claffy.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements "
#### Theatrical Club *v.*Bernard.

May 16, 1913.

Complaint. Before Judge Ellis. Fulton superior court. July 6, 1912.

*James L. Key,*for plaintiff in error.

Lumpkin, J.

1. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict. The motion for a new trial was based only on the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and the weight of the evidence, and without evidence to support it. The presiding judge approved the finding, and this court will not interfere.

2. Although the evidence for the plaintiff might have- authorized a verdict for a greater amount than that found, under th& facts of the case this will not necessitate a reversal on motion of the defendant.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
§ 1015.501 Referrals to the Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury's Cross-Servicing Program. ( a ) DOE may authorize Treasury to refer a delinquent debt to the DOJ for litigation in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(g), the DCIA, the revised Federal Claims Collection Standards (31 CFR parts 900-904), and other applicable authorities. DOE shall ensure that all of the rights and protections afforded to the debtor under 31 U.S.C. 3711(e) have been fulfilled.
( b ) As described in § 1015.201(e), under the DCIA (31 U.S.C. 3711(g)), DOE is required to transfer all debts over 180 days delinquent to Treasury for purposes of debt collection (*i.e.,* cross-servicing). As part of its regular debt collection procedures, Treasury will refer debts to the DOJ for litigation on behalf of DOE.
Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 75 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 1 of 1
###### Editorial Note on Part 1045

#### Editorial Notes:Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.

§ 1045.115 Who is authorized to derivatively classify matter that contains RD, FRD, or TFNI?

Editorial Notes:

Nomenclature changes to part 1045 appear at 88 FR 41294, June 26, 2023, and 88 FR 82238, Nov. 24, 2023.

(a) Specific authority and/or training is required to derivatively classify matter containing RD, FRD, or TFNI. These derivative classification decisions must be based on a classification guide, a classification bulletin, or a portion-marked source document and must only be made in the RD Derivative Classifier's subject areas of expertise. In cases where guidance does not exist, for RD the Director, Office of Classification must make an initial determination that information is RD or that the matter contains RD, and for FRD DOE and DoD must jointly determine that the information is FRD or the matter contains FRD. No other agency or agency personnel has the authority to make an initial determination regarding RD or FRD. See § 1045.135 for the process for requesting a determination in cases where guidance does not exist.

(b) Each person who derivatively classifies matter containing RD or FRD must be an RD Derivative Classifier.

(c) Except for DoD military and DoD Federal civilian employees, each RD Derivative Classifier must be designated by name or position in writing in accordance with agency procedures.

(d) An agency contractor employee may be an RD Derivative Classifier. All contractor employees, including DoD contractors, must be designated by name or position as such in writing in accordance with agency procedures.

(e) Once a person is an RD Derivative Classifier for an agency, he or she may classify matter containing RD or FRD in those subject areas in which they have programmatic expertise for any agency, provided the other agency or agencies accept the existing authority.

(f) No specific designation as an RD Derivative Classifier is required to classify matter containing TFNI. Any person who has received training required by § 1045.120 may classify matter containing TFNI.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James J. Byrnes, Jr., Appellant.

[813 NYS2d 924]

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Chemung County (Buckley, J.), rendered March 8, 2004, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

Following his sixth alcohol-related driving arrest, defendant *1161was charged in an indictment with two counts of driving while intoxicated. In full satisfaction of the indictment, he pleaded guilty to one of the charges and executed a drug court contract under which he agreed, among other things, to participate in a drug treatment program. He consented to have sentencing adjourned while he participated in the program. In addition, defendant waived his right to appeal and agreed to a term of imprisonment of 1 to 3 years if he did not successfully complete the program. When defendant was discharged prior to completing the program, he was sentenced to 1 to 3 years in prison. He now appeals.

Inasmuch as the record discloses that defendant entered a knowing, voluntary and intelligent plea and waiver of the right to appeal, we will not review his challenge to the severity of the sentence *(see People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 255-256 [2006]; *People v Clow,*10 AD3d 803, 804 [2004]).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Mugglin, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
#### § 932.23 Undersize olives and limited use size olives.

*Undersize olives* means olives of a size which, pursuant to § 932.51(a)(3), shall be disposed of in noncanning use; and *limited use size olives* means processed olives of any size which, pursuant to § 932.52(a)(3), is authorized for limited use.

[36 FR 20356, Oct. 21, 1971, as amended at 47 FR 32906, July 30, 1982]
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

ELIE RAPHAEL

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 16

- 4365

[ October 19, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Geoffrey D. Cohen , Judge; L.T. Case No. 14013281

CF10A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Mara C. Herbert, Assistant

Public Defender, West Palm Beach , for appellant.

Elie Raphael, Bonifay, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

D AMOORGIAN

, C IKLIN and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Power

r and

nefit

Medicare has become aware of fraud inthe power wheelchair and scooterindustry. For example, some suppliersof medical equipment try to cheat theprogram by offering power wheelchairsand scooters to people who don’t meetMedicare’s rules. Medicare is workingvery hard with other government agencies to protect the Medicare program from fraud and to help youget the equipment that best meets yourneeds. Medicare Fraud?Medicare fraud can happen when yoursupplier gives false or misleading information to you or the Medicareprogram in order to get payment for equipment that you don’t need.Medicare fraud wastes a lot of moneyevery year. You end up paying for itwith higher health care costs. 

You Can Help Protect Yourselfand Medicare from FraudYou can help by making sure you get theequipment that best fits your medicalneeds as determined by your doctor. Youcan also help by understanding when it’sappropriate for Medicare to pay for powerwheelchairs and scooters. How to Know if You Qualifyfor a Power Wheelchair orScooterPeople who qualify for power wheelchairsor scooters can’t walk on their own andhave severe upper body weakness becauseof a brain, spinal, or muscle condition. To qualify for a power wheelchair underMedicare’s rules, you must• have a health condition that makes you

unable to walk on your own, 

• be unable to operate a manual 

wheelchair,

• be able to safely operate the controls on

a power wheelchair, and 

• have a face-to-face exam and an order

from the doctor treating you.

You must meet all of these conditions to qualify. 
P o w e r W h e e l c h a i r a n d S c o o t e r B e n e f i t

e of either 

r wheelchair or

 a power 

a long term basis,

e equiment to

t costs. Talk to

 more about this

d 

lp protect

ut for fraud. 

u a free power

u to use their 

you didn’t give

o.

For More InformationMedicare is here for you 24 hours aday, everyday.To get more information

• Look at www.medicare.gov on 

the web.

• Call 1-800-MEDICARE 

(1-800-633-4227). TTY users 

should call 1-877-486-2048. 

What to do if You SuspectFraudUse this three step approach if yoususpect fraud:1. Call your health care provider.2. Call your Durable Medical

Equipment Regional Carrier (the company that contracts withMedicare to pay bills for durablemedical equipment, like wheelchairs)

*.

3. Call the Inspector General’s 

hotline at 1-800-HHS-TIPS (1-800-447-8477). 

*To get the telephone number for your Durable MedicalEquipment Regional Carrier, visitwww.medicare.gov on the web andselect “Helpful Contacts.” You canalso call 1-800-MEDICARE (1-800-633-4227) and talk to aCustomer Service Representative toget the telephone number.
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 1 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 2 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 3 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 4 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 5 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 6 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 7 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 8 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 9 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 10 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 11 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 12 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 13 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 14 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 15 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 16 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 17 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 18 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 19 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 20 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 21 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 22 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 23 of 24
Case 3:06-cv-00728-MHT-WC Document 54 Filed 06/04/2007 Page 24 of 24
# SUBCHAPTER G—CONTRACT MANAGEMENT   

- PART 1642—CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION 
- PART 1643—CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS 
- PART 1644—SUBCONTRACTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 
- PART 1645—GOVERNMENT PROPERTY 
- PART 1646—QUALITY ASSURANCE 
- PART 1649—TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS 

- PART 1642—CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION    - Subpart 1642.12—Novation and Change-of-Name Agreements     - 1642.1201   Definitions.
    - 1642.1204   Agreement to recognize a successor in interest (novation agreement).
    - 1642.1205   Agreement to recognize carrier's change of name.
  - Subpart 1642.70—Management Agreement (in Lieu of Novation Agreement)     - 1642.7001   Management agreement.
- PART 1643—CONTRACT MODIFICATIONS       - Subpart 1643.2—Changes     - 1643.205-70   Contract clause.
- PART 1644—SUBCONTRACTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES     - Subpart 1644.1—General     - 1644.170   Policy for FEHB Program subcontracting.
  - Subpart 1644.2—Consent to Subcontracts     - 1644.270   FEHBP contract clause.
- PART 1645—GOVERNMENT PROPERTY     - Subpart 1645.3—Providing Equipment     - 1645.303-70   Contract clause.
- PART 1646—QUALITY ASSURANCE     - Subpart 1646.2—Contract Quality Requirements     - 1646.201   Contract Quality Policy.
  - Subpart 1646.3—Contract Clauses     - 1646.301   Contractor inspection requirements.
- PART 1649—TERMINATION OF CONTRACTS    - 1649.002-70   Applicability of the FAR to FEHB acquisitions.
  - Subpart 1649.1—General Principles     - 1649.101-70   FEHBP renewal and withdrawal of approval clause.
    - 1649.101-71   FEHBP termination for convenience clause.
    - 1649.101-72   FEHBP termination for default clause.
1422.1403 Waivers.

The Director, PAM is authorized to waive any or all of the terms of the clause at FAR 52.222-36,

Affirmative Action for Workers with Disabilities, under the conditions prescribed in FAR 22.1403(a),

and waive any requirement in FAR Subpart 22.14 as prescribed in FAR 22.1403(b). Requests for

waivers shall be made in writing by the CO through the HCA to the Director, PAM.

Parent topic: Subpart 1422.14 - Employment of Workers with Disabilities