alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00608-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.C.R. and J.D.D., Children

From the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-PA-02092

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding1

Opinion by: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Sitting: Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: February 4, 2015

MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; AFFIRMED

Appellant mother appeals the trial court’s judgment terminating her parental rights to her 

children, J.C.R. and J.D.D. The Texas Department of Family and Protective Services (“the 

Department”) moved to have appellant’s parental rights terminated. After a bench trial, the trial 

court found mother’s parental rights should be terminated because she violated various provisions 

of section 161.001(1) of the Texas Family Code. See generally TEX. FAM. CODE ANN.

§ 161.001(1) (West 2014). The trial court further determined termination would be in the best 

interests of the children pursuant to section 161.001(2). Id. § 161.001(2). 

1 The Honorable Laura Salinas is the judge of the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas. However, the 

order of termination was signed by Associate Judge Charles E. Montemayor. 

 
04-14-00608-CV

Appellant’s court-appointed appellate attorney has filed a motion to withdraw and a brief 

containing a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating there are no arguable grounds to 

be advanced and concluding the appeal is frivolous. The brief meets the requirements of Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). See In re R.R., No. 04-03-00096-CV, 2003 WL 21157944, *4 

(Tex. App.—San Antonio May 21, 2003, order) (applying Anders procedure to appeals from orders 

terminating parental rights), disp. on merits, 2003 WL 22080522 (Tex. App.—San Antonio Sept. 

10, 2003, no pet.) (mem. op.). Mother was provided a copy of the brief and informed of her right 

to obtain a copy of the appellate record and file her own brief. See Nichols v. State, 954 S.W.2d 

83, 85-86 (Tex. App.—San Antonio July 23, 1997, no pet.); In re R.R., 2003 WL 21157944, at *4. 

Appointed counsel provided mother with a form which she could sign, date, and file with this court 

in order to obtain a copy of the record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319–20 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2014). Mother filed neither a request for the record nor a pro se brief. 

We have reviewed the record and the attorney’s brief and we agree with counsel that the 

appellate points do not present a substantial question for appellate review. Accordingly, we hold 

the trial court did not err in terminating mother’s parental rights. We grant the motion to withdraw 

and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

- 2 -
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with this quarterly report onForm 10-Q of Electro Scientific Industries, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterlyperiod ended November 26, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kerry Mustoe, CorporateController, Chief Accounting Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)                                  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Kerry Mustoe                                    |   |
|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Kerry Mustoe                                        |
| Corporate Controller, Chief Accounting  Officer and |
| Interim Chief Financial Officer                     |
| Dated: December 21, 2005                            |

 

This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section1350, and not for any other purpose.  Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to Electro Scientific Industries, Inc. and will be retained by ElectroScientific Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
41292.

#### WILLIAMS v. THE STATE.

Argued May 4, 1965

Decided May 12, 1965.

*674
      *B. Clarence Mayfield,*for plaintiff in error.

*Andrew J. Ryan, Jr., Solicitor, Sylvan A. Garfunkel, Tom A. Edenfield,*contra.

Eberhardt, Judge.

The evidence was ample to sustain a donviction, and the overruling of the motion was proper.

Reliance upon the cases of *Bailey v. State,*60 Ga. App. 556 (4 SE2d 409); *Chandler v. State,*63 Ga. App. 304 (11 SE2d 103); *Jones v. State,*64 Ga. App. 308 (13 SE2d 91); *Ball v. State,*72 Ga. App. 45 (32 SE2d 912); *Goss v. State,*82 Ga. App. 533 (61 SE2d 570) and *Fleming v. State,*95 Ga. App. 3 (96 SE2d 554) is misplaced. In *Fleming*it appeared that the defendant’s wife, after a quarrel with her husband and while he was away staying at a hotel, led the police to the house and showed them 25 blank pads which might have been used for making lottery books. No other paraphernalia of any kind were found. It was not beyond probability that the wife had placed the pads in the house and then reported the matter to the police because of anger with her husband. In *Ball*a lottery ribbon was found in the home of one John Smith where the defendant and four others were arrested. He had no lottery paraphernalia on him and denied any knowledge of it. It was held that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to connect the defendant with the ribbon. In *Chandler*the defendant had a piece of adding machine tape carrying a date and seven numbers on it. The witness for the State admitted that it could have been something other than a lottery ribbon. This was held insufficient to sustain a conviction. In *Bailey*a wife was prosecuted when 25 tickets were found in a room of the house where she lived and was. Since the husband lived there also the evidence was insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save guilt. In *Goss*the defendant and another in his car were followed by a police car for some distance, but they lost the trail. Shortly thereafter other police located the car standing in front of a house and when the defendant came out he was searched. He had no lottery tickets, etc. but did have about $50 in money, mostly in bills, on him. Lottery tickets were found on the ground under the car. This *675was insufficient. The evidence in *Jones*was insufficient for like reasons.

It will be seen at once that the facts here are not such as to make any of those cases controlling, for here the defendant was found alone in a house with the door fastened, where telephone calls were rapidly coming in to place bets on numbers. Lottery equipment was present. Although the defendant denied any connection with the house and contended that it was that of a man “on a ship,” some of the callers identified him as the one with whom they wished to place bets.

The circumstantial evidence was strong and the defendant’s explanation of his presence was weak and equivocal. The conviction was authorized.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.*
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 15, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00436

- CR

Rodrigo GARZA

- DE

- LA

- CRUZ

,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 4 06th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CRE000344

- D4 Honorable Oscar J. Hale, Jr., Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

On August 9, 2018, the court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal filed a notification of late record, stating that the appellant has failed to pay or make

arrangements to p ay the fee for preparing the reporter’s record.

We, therefore, ORDER appellant to provide written proof to this court on or before August 27, 2018 that either (1) the reporter’s fee has been paid o r arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the reporter’s fee. If appellant fails to respond within the time provided, appellant’s brief will be due on or before September 26, 2018 , and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in appellant’s brief that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(c).

__________ _______________________ Irene Rios , Justice

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

court o n this 15th day of August, 2018

._____________ ______________________ K eith E. H ottle

Clerk of Court
#### § 441.350 Basis and purpose.

Section 1915(d) of the Act permits States to offer, under a waiver of statutory requirements, home and community-based services not otherwise available under Medicaid to individuals age 65 or older, in exchange for accepting an aggregate limit on the amount of expenditures for which they claim FFP for certain services furnished to these individuals. The home and community-based services that may be furnished are listed in § 440.181 of this subchapter. This subpart describes the procedures the Medicaid agency must follow to request a waiver.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 21, 2014

d0514 

# Order

Clerk May 21, 2014

148553

NATHAN M. BROWN,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 148553

COA: 315911

Clinton CC: 09

- 021478

- DM

LYNETTE A. BROWN,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 10, 2013

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuad ed that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 16

- 00336

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M .S.M. , a Child

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014

- PA

- 02012 Honorable Richard Garcia, Associate Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s modification of appellant’s child support obligation is REVERSED. We RENDER judgment reinstating appellant’s child sup port obligation of $419 a month . The remainder of the trial court’s judgment

is AFFIRMED.

SIGNED December 14, 2016.

_____________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
#### § 440.260 Methods and standards to assure quality of services.

The plan must include a description of methods and standards used to assure that services are of high quality.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23(c)
 



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-
55931 and 333-32831 on Form S-3, and Registration Statement No. 333-45999 on
Form S-4, and Registration Statements No. 333-32831, 333-32833, 333-32835, 
333-32837, 333-32839, 333-32841, 333-32843 and 333-45657 on Form S-8 of Texas
Utilities Company of our report dated February 24, 1998, appearing in the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Texas Utilities Company for the year ended December 31,
1997.



DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


Dallas, Texas
March 25, 1998
Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 43301 Division St., Suite 206 Lancaster, CA 93535-4649 

# elA

Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District 661.723.8070 Fax 661.723.3450

Eldon Heaston, Executive Director August 18, 2015 Carol Sutkus State of California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board P. 0. Box 2815 Sacramento, California 95812 Project Title: Adoption of AVAQ1VID Federal Negative Declarations (8 hour Ozone

Standard) for Twenty Control Technique Guidelines Source Categories
Dear Ms. Sutkus: The Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District (AVAQMD) requests that the California Air Resources Board submit the AVAQMD Federal Negative Declarations (8 hour Ozone Standard) for Twenty Control Technique Guidelines Source Categories to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for inOlusion in the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) requires areas designated non-attainment and classified moderate and above to implement Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for sources subject to Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) documents issued by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for "major sources" of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (N0x) which are ozone precursors. Effective May 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008), USEPA lowered the primary ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) from 0.084 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm. For purposes of the FCAA, the District has been designated non-attainment for ozone and classified as Severe-15 for the new 0.075 ppm 8-hour standard. As a result of the shift to the 0.075 ppm standard, the District is required to update rules to meet RACT requirements. For those CTG source categories not represented within the area designated non-attainment for ozone, USEPA requires the submission of a Federal Negative Declaration (FND) certifying that those sources are not present These "Federal Negative Declarations" are different from the Negative Declarations associated with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Instead, these FNDs, as adopted by the Governing Board, will serve as official certification to the USEPA that there are stationary sources or emitting facilities in these categories located within the area designated as non-attainment for ozone within the AVAQMD.

Printed on recycled paper 

## Clea

- n Cities Antelope ValleyAlan T De Salvio

Ms. Sutkus Page 2

If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact me at (760) 245-1661, extension 6726, or Tracy Walters at extension 6122. Please note that all documents required for a complete submission were sent electronically on August 18, 2015. Sincerely,

Deputy Director — Mojave Desert Operations

AJD/tw CARB SIP Submittal Request 2015 AVAQMD FND
HomeMalaysia

# Malaysia

111 items

        -    Other Release  		Clean EDGE Asia – Malaysia: ENR’s Power Sector Program Conducts Kickoff Meeting for Solar PV + Battery Energy Storage System Analysis	  October 17, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		United States Ambassador-at-Large Dyer’s Travel to Malaysia	  October 13, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Malaysia National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenAugust 30, 2023 
        -    Special Briefing  		Digital Press Briefing with David M. Turk, U.S. Department of Energy	  August 24, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Investment Climate Statements: 	  July 26, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Malaysia	  June 15, 2023 
        -    Other Release  		Clean EDGE Asia: ENR’s Power Sector Program (PSP) Hosts Clean Energy Study Tour for Malaysian Energy Sector Stakeholders	  June 5, 2023 
        -    Other Release  		Clean EDGE Asia Launches the Country Spotlight Series with Malaysia	  May 12, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Malaysia	  March 20, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		The United States Launches First Regional Summit for the Academy for Women Entrepreneurs in Kuala Lumpur	  March 6, 2023 

previous page1234…12next page

Back to Top
§ 456.170 Medical, psychiatric, and social evaluations. ( a ) Before admission to a mental hospital or before authorization for payment, the attending physician or staff physician must make a medical evaluation of each applicant's or beneficiary's need for care in the hospital; and appropriate professional personnel must make a psychiatric and social evaluation.
( b ) Each medical evaluation must include— ( 1 ) Diagnoses;
( 2 ) Summary of present medical findings;
( 3 ) Medical history;
( 4 ) Mental and physical functional capacity;
( 5 ) Prognoses; and
( 6 ) A recommendation by a physician concerning— ( i ) Admission to the mental hospital; or
( ii ) Continued care in the mental hospital for individuals who apply for Medicaid while in the mental hospital.
§ 436.301 General rules. ( a ) A Medicaid agency may provide Medicaid to individuals specified in this subpart who: ( 1 ) Either: ( i ) Have income that meets the standard in § 436.811; or
( ii ) If their income is more than allowed under the standard, have incurred medical expenses at least equal to the difference between their income and the applicable income standards; and
( 2 ) Have resources that meet the standard in §§ 436.840 and 436.843.
( b ) If the agency chooses this option, the following provisions apply: ( 1 ) The agency must provide Medicaid to the following individuals who meet the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section: ( i ) All pregnant women during the course of their pregnancy who, except for income and resources, would be eligible for Medicaid as mandatory or optional categorically needy under subparts B and C of this part;
( ii ) All individuals under 18 years of age who, except for income and resources, would be eligible for Medicaid as mandatory categorically needy under subpart B of this part;
( iii ) All newborn children born on or after October 1, 1984, to a woman who is eligible as medically needy and receiving Medicaid on the date of the child's birth. The child is deemed to have applied and been found eligible for Medicaid on the date of birth and remains eligible as medically needy for ne year so long as the woman remains eligible and the child is a member of the woman's household. If the woman's basis of eligibility changes to categorically needy, the child is eligible as categorically needy under § 436.124. The woman is considered to remain eligible if she meets the spend-down requirements in any consecutive budget period following the birth of the child.
( iv ) Women who, while pregnant, applied for, were eligible for, and received Medicaid services as medically needed on the day that their pregnancy ends. The agency must provide medically needy eligibility to these women for an extended period following termination of pregnancy. This period begins on the last day of the pregnancy and extends through the end of the month in which a 60-day period following termination of pregnancy ends. Eligibility must be provided, regardless of changes in the women's financial circumstances that may occur within this extended period. These women are eligible for the extended period for all services under the plan that are pregnancy-related (as defined in § 440.210(c)(1) of this subchapter).
( 2 ) The agency may provide Medicaid to any or all of the following groups of individuals: ( i ) Individuals under age 21 (§ 436.308).
( ii ) Specified relatives (§ 436.310).
( iii ) Aged (§ 436.320).
( iv ) Blind (§ 436.321).
( v ) Disabled (§ 436.322).
( 3 ) If the agency provides Medicaid to any individual in a group specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the agency must provide Medicaid to all individuals eligible to be members of that group.
[46 FR 47990, Sept. 30, 1981; 46 FR 54743, Nov. 4, 1981, as amended at 52 FR 43073, Nov. 9, 1987; 55 FR 48610, Nov. 21, 1990; 58 FR 4935, Jan. 19, 1993]
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 16, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 47627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22290]


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

 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 11874 and <greek-i> 11875]


California Disaster <greek-i> CA-00141

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the State of California dated 09/09/2009.
    Incident: 49 Fire.
    Incident Period: 08/30/2009 And Continuing.

DATES: Effective Date: 09/09/2009.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/09/2009.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/09/2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing And Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally 
announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Placer.
Contiguous Counties: California:
El Dorado, Nevada, Sacramento, Sutter, Yuba.
Nevada:
Carson City, Douglas, Washoe.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere...................      5.500
Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere................      2.750
Businesses WIth Credit Available Elsewhere...................      6.000
Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit        4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Other (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit             4.500
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit             4.000
 Available Elsewhere.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 11874 5 
and for economic injury is 11875 0.
    The States which received an EIDL Declaration <greek-i> are 
California, Nevada.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

    Dated: September 9, 2009.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-22290 Filed 9-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
Exhibit 32.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Annual Report of Union Bankshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of her 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 operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Union Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by Union Bankshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


|                                          | 
|----------------------------------------- | 
|/s/ Marsha A. Mongeon                     | 
|Marsha A. Mongeon
Chief Financial Officer | 

April 6, 2010