alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-81,450-02

EX P ARTE BIL LY F AIRCLOTH, App licant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. D-1-D C-11-200824- A IN THE 167TH DISTRICT COURT

F ROM TRAVIS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant filed this a

pplication for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district c lerk forwa

rded it to this Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. Under Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, a district cler k is require d to forwa

rd to this Court, among other things, “the application, an y answers filed, any motions filed, transcr ipts of all depositions a

nd hear ings, any

aff idavits, and any other matters such as officia l r ecor ds used by the court in resolving issues of fac t.” Id
. at § 3(d); see also T E X . R
. A P P . P
. 7 3
. 4 (b )( 4). The rec ord forwarde d to this Court appea rs, however, to be incomplete. Copies of t he following do cu m en t s , which the Docket R ec o rd i n volume six indicates wer e filed in the trial court, are not in the forwa rded rec ord: (1) J oint Stipul ation of Evidence ; (2) J oint Motion to Desig nate I ssues of Fa ct and2

Proposed Orde r Desig nating I ssues; (3) Amended J oint Moti o n t o Desig nate I ssues of Fa ct and Proposed Order Designa ting I ssues; (4) the tria l court’s Order Desig nating I ssues; and (5) Ag ree d Proposed Finding s of Fa ct and Conclusions of L aw. The district cler

k shall either forwa

rd to this Court or cer

tify in writing that these documents
are not part of the rec ord. The district cler k shall comply with this order within thirty day s from the date of this order.

Filed: Nove mber 28, 2022 Do not publish
#### § 709.12 Defining polygraph examination questions.

The examiner determines the exact wording of the polygraph questions based on the examiner's pretest interview of the covered person, the covered person's understanding of the questions, established test question procedures from the Department of Defense Polygraph Institute, and other input from the covered person.
222 So.2d 65

#### Aliston STEPHNEY v. Borlande D. ROBERTSON and Alvin B. Werner W. R. C. Construction Company, Inc.

No. 49774.

May 9, 1969.

In re: Aliston Stephney applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 219 So.2d 9.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, the result is correct.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          15,860
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   222
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    215,156
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        369,976
<ALLOWANCE>                                    (3,382)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 630,637
<DEPOSITS>                                     378,972
<SHORT-TERM>                                    87,444
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,696
<LONG-TERM>                                    118,200
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           11,972
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           480
<OTHER-SE>                                      29,873
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 630,637
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 13,544
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,640
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    17
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                20,201
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               5,581
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,760
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            9,441
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      260
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 405
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,260
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,358
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,358
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,143
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.08
<LOANS-NON>                                        685
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,077
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      119
<RECOVERIES>                                       164
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,382
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,902
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          1,480


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6689

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

GRADY LASSITER, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (2:01-cr-00154-HCM)

Submitted: June 26, 2008 Decided: July 3, 2008

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Grady Lassiter, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Raymond Edward Patricco,

Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Grady Lassiter, Jr., appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for modification or reduction of his sentence.

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. United States v. Lassiter, No. 2:01-cr-00154-HCM (E.D. Va.

filed Apr. 1, 2008; entered Apr. 2, 2008). 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.

AFFIRMED
###### Editorial Note on Part 9

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 9 appear at 82 FR 52825, Nov. 15, 2017.

#### § 9.56 Accompanying persons.

An individual requesting access to records about himself or herself may be accompanied by another individual of his or her own choosing. Both the individual requesting access and the individual accompanying him or her shall sign the required form indicating that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is authorized to discuss the contents of the subject record in the presence of both individuals.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997             MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,129,627               1,129,627
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,748,775               7,748,775
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (392,500)               (392,500)
<INVENTORY>                                  7,802,512               7,802,512
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            16,982,098              16,982,098
<PP&E>                                      10,994,875              10,994,875
<DEPRECIATION>                             (3,725,658)             (3,725,658)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              24,833,381              24,833,381
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      (4,280,387)             (4,280,387)
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                     (300,465)               (300,465)
<OTHER-SE>                                (14,341,299)            (14,341,299)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>              (24,833,381)            (24,833,381)
<SALES>                                      5,480,970              18,540,327
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,480,970              18,540,327
<CGS>                                        3,036,982             (9,911,814)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,098,568            (19,079,268)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (237,026)               (561,408)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (22,500)                (97,500)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (253,932)               (554,788)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (854,624)             (1,100,349)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (854,624)             (1,100,349)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                569,946                 569,946
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (284,678)               (530,403)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)                   (.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)                   (.07)
        

</TABLE>
April 27, 2006

To: Aurora Gold Corporation
3540 West 41st Avenue, Suite 204
Vancouver, BC V6N 3E6

Tel. 604-687-4432
Fax 604-687-4709

Attention: Cameron Richardson
Email: c.richardson@telus.net
       ----------------------


From: Tomas Almeida, Certified Translator

Re: Translation of Memorandum of Understanding regarding Bigode Project


                            Translator's Declaration

I,  Tomas  Almeida,  Certified  Portuguese to English Translator, Member in good
standing  of  the  Society  of  Translators and Interpreters of British Columbia
(STIBC),  which  is  a  member  association  of  the  Canadian  Translators  and
Interpreters Council (CTIC), hereby attest that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, the above-mentioned document is a true, correct and complete translation
of  the  Portuguese  document  presented  to  me.


Tomas  Almeida


Tomas Almeida
19780 Honeydew Drive
Pitt Meadows, BC V3Y 2S6

Tel. 604-465-6128
Fax 604-465-6129
Cell.604-202-0031
Email: talmeida@telus.net
       ------------------
(June 30, 1970)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Paul Martin, Appellant.

Reynolds, J. P.

Appeal from an order of the County Court, Columbia County, denying appellant’s application for a writ of error *coram nobis,*without a hearing. Appellant having plead guilty cannot now raise the issue of the propriety of his arrest *(People*v. *Nicholson,*11 N Y 2d 1067, cert. den. 371 U. S. 929; see *People*v. *Bolon,*25 N Y 2d 974; *People ex rel. Doepel*v. *McMann,*25 N Y 2d 683). Order affirmed. Reynolds, J. P., Staley, Jr., Greenblott, Cooke and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum by Reynolds, J. P.
Editorial Note on Part 180
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 180.700 When may the suspending official issue a suspension? Suspension is a serious action. Using the procedures of this subpart and subpart F of this part, the suspending official may impose suspension only when that official determines that— ( a ) There exists an indictment for, or other adequate evidence to suspect, an offense listed under § 180.800(a), or
( b ) There exists adequate evidence to suspect any other cause for debarment listed under § 180.800(b) through (d); and
( c ) Immediate action is necessary to protect the public interest.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 228 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 228

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                        March 24, 2017.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1628) to provide for reconciliation 
pursuant to title II of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 
2017. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
amendments specified in section 2 of this resolution shall be considered as 
adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order 
against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further 
amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) four 
hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on the Budget or their respective designees; and (2) one 
motion to recommit with or without instructions.
    Sec. 2.  The amendments referred to in the first section of this resolution 
are as follows:
     (a) The amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules 
accompanying this resolution modified by the amendment printed in part B of that 
report.
    (b) The amendment printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules 
accompanying this resolution modified by the amendments printed in part D and 
part E of that report.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
2007-1906.

#### State v. Wilder.

Butler App. No. CA2006-11-291. On motion for leave to file delayed appeal. Motion denied.

Lundberg Stratton and Cupp, JJ., dissent.
# EUR-Lex - 31979R0936 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31979R0936

**Commission Regulation (EEC) No 936/79 of 11 May 1979 on the classification of meat of bovine animals under subheading 02.01 A II a) 4 aa) of the Common Customs Tariff **

*
Official Journal L 117 , 12/05/1979 P. 0019 - 0019 Finnish special edition: Chapter 2 Volume 2 P. 0140 Greek special edition: Chapter 02 Volume 7 P. 0211 Swedish special edition: Chapter 2 Volume 2 P. 0140 Spanish special edition: Chapter 02 Volume 6 P. 0005 Portuguese special edition Chapter 02 Volume 6 P. 0005 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 936/79 of 11 May 1979 on the classification of meat of bovine animals under subheading 02.01 A II a) 4 aa) of the Common Customs Tariff

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 97/69 of 16 January 1969 on measures to be taken for uniform application of the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 280/77 (2), and in particular Article 3 thereof,

Whereas, in order to ensure uniform application of the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff, provisions must be laid down concerning the tariff classification of separated forequarters of bovine animals, in a fresh or chilled state, from which the atlas bone has been removed;

Whereas subheading 02.01 A II a) 4 aa) of the Common Customs Tariff annexed to Council Regulation (EEC) No 950/68 (3), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 882/79 (4), refers to meat of bovine animals, fresh or chilled, unboned (bone-in);

Whereas Note 1 A e) to Chapter 2 of the Common Customs Tariff precisely defines separated forequarters, indicating in particular that they are the front part of a half-carcass comprising all the bones ; whereas such products which do not include the atlas bone cannot therefore be considered to be separated forequarters;

Whereas the products in question are to be classified as meat of bovine animals, fresh or chilled, other, unboned (bone-in) under subheading 02.01 A II a) 4 aa);

Whereas the measures proved for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee on Common Customs Tariff Nomenclature,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Separated forequarters of bovine animals in a fresh or chilled state, from which the atlas bone has been removed, fall to be classified under the following subheading of the Common Customs Tariff:

02.01 Meat and edible offals of the animals falling within heading No 01.01, 01.02, 01.03 or 01.04, fresh, chilled or frozen:

A. Meat:

II. Of bone animals:

a) Fresh or chilled:

4. Other:

aa) Unboned (bone-in)

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the 21st day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 May 1979.

For the Commission

Étienne DAVIGNON

Member of the Commission (1)OJ No L 14, 21.1.1969, p. 1. (2)OJ No L 40, 11.2.1977, p. 1. (3)OJ No L 172, 22.7.1968, p. 1. (4)OJ No L 111, 4.5.1979, p. 14.
###### Editorial Note on Part 180

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 180.965 Legal proceedings.

*Legal proceedings* means any criminal proceeding or any civil judicial proceeding, including a proceeding under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (31 U.S.C. 3801-3812), to which the Federal Government or a State or local government or quasi-governmental authority is a party. The term also includes appeals from those proceedings.
#### KENT, Appellant, v. TOWN OF PATTERSON, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

December 4, 1914.)

Action by N. Charles Kent against the Town of Patterson.

No opinion. Judgment and order (80 Misc. Rep. 560, 141 N. Y. Supp. 932) unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Exhibit 31.1

              SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


I, D. Scott Wilkerson, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BNP Residential
Properties, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

      (a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
      disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,
      to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
      its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
      prepared;

      (b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
      effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
      the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

      (c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
      control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
      most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
      likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors:

      (a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial information; and

      (b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.



November 7, 2003                         /s/ D. Scott Wilkerson
                                     ---------------------------------------
                                     D. Scott Wilkerson
                                     President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       26
<PAGE>
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 20th day of May, 2013, a copy of the foregoing was served via 

electronic mail on the parties named below:

________________________________

Vanessa C. Krasniewicz

russell.bailey@alpa.org robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com

rsilverberg@sgbdc.com patrick.rizzi@hoganlovells.com

mgoldman@sgbdc.com jhill@dowlohnes.com

msinick@ssd.com perkmann@dowlohnes.com

esauer@ssd.com robert.land@jetblue.com

cdonley@ssd.com efaberman@wileyrein.com

robert.wirick@aa.com kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com

francis.heil@aa.com bob.kneisley@wnco.com

james.kaleigh@aa.com dan.weiss@united.com

gmurphy@crowell.com steve.morrissey@united.com

lhalloway@crowell.com karine.faden@united.com

rpommer@atlasair.com thomas.bolling@united.com

sametta.c.barnett@delta.com anita.mosner@hklaw.com

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com jennifer.nowak@hklaw.com

scott.mcclain@delta.com howard.kass@usairways.com

nssparks@fedex.com benjamin.slocum@usairways.com

gbleopard@fedex.com dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil

cefelts@fedex.com william.stallings@usdoj.gov

jyoung@yklaw.com esta.rosenberg@dot.gov

dkirstein@yklaw.com paul.gretch@dot.gov

dmrosenthal@jamhoff.com todd.homan@dot.gov

dpdean@jamhoff.com bob.goldner@dot.gov

mlbenge@zsrlaw.com peter.irvine@dot.gov

rdmathias@zsrlaw.com reese.davidson@dot.gov

cjsimpson@zsrlaw.com john.allen@faa.gov

dhainbach@ggh-airlaw.com urskr@state.gov

mroller@rollerbauer.com
#### § 1532.10 What does this part do?

This part adopts the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part 180, as supplemented by this part, as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) policies and procedures for nonprocurement debarment and suspension. It thereby gives regulatory effect for the EPA to the OMB guidance as supplemented by this part. This part satisfies the requirements in section 3 of Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension” (3 CFR 1986 Comp., p. 189), Executive Order 12689, “Debarment and Suspension” (3 CFR 1989 Comp., p. 235) and 31 U.S.C. 6101 note (Section 2455, Pub. L. 103-355, 108 Stat. 3327).