alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-82,834-01

EX PARTE LEONARD STRICKLAND, Applicant

 ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 20080D05040 IN THE 171 DISTRICT COURT ST

FROM EL PASO COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). After a period of deferred adjudication,

Applicant was convicted of one count of aggravated robbery and one count of robbery. He was

sentenced to seven and a half years’ imprisonment for each count. He did not appeal his convictions.

Applicant’s writ application alleges that his convictions violate double jeopardy because he

is being twice punished for the same criminal act. This Court remanded the case for further

development of the probable double jeopardy issue. 
2

The trial court has determined Applicant’s conviction for robbery is based on the same

actions and same victim as his conviction for aggravated robbery and therefore violates double

jeopardy. We agree that Applicant has suffered multiple punishments for the same offense. Ex parte

Cavazos, 203 S.W.3d 333, 337 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Relief is granted. The judgment in count

two of Cause No. 20080D05040 in the 171 District Court of El Paso County is vacated and set st

aside. All remaining issues are denied. 

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the TexasDepartment of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: September 16, 2015

Do not publish
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T LA N CE REBERG ER, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. G R E G C O X , N D O C D e putyof O p e r a tio n s ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 11- 15358 D. C . No . 2 : 1 0 - c v - 0 2 0 2 2 - GMNG WF ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

N e va da G l or i aM . N a varr o, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 17, 2012 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , P A E Z , an dB E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. L ance R eber ger, a N evada s t at e pri soner, appeal s pro se fr om the di stri ct c o u rt’s ju d g m e n t d is m is s in g h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 a c tio n a lle g in g p r is o n o f f ic ia ls vi ol at ed hi s c i vi l ri gh t s. W e have j uri sdi ct i on un der 28 U . S . C . § 1 29 1. W e r evi ew 

# FI LED APR26 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 15358 2 d e n o v o ad is tr ic t c o u rt’s d is m is s a l u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) f o rf a ilu r e to s ta te ac l a i m, H

uf t i le v . Mi cc i o-Fon se ca , 4 1 0 F . 3 d1 1 3 6 , 1 1 3 8 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) , an dwe a f f i rm. T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyd is m is s e dR e b e r g e r ’s c la im s th a t p r is o n o f f ic ia ls d e p r iv e dh im o f

p r o p e rtyw ith o u t du e p r o c e s s b e c au s e R e b e r g e rh a dan a d e qu a te p o s td e p r iv a tio n r e m e d yu n d e rN e v a d alaw . See H ud son v. P alm er , 468 U . S . 517, 5 3 3 ( 1 9 8 4 ) ( “[ A ]n u n au th o r iz e din te n tio n a l d e p r iv a tio n o f p r o p e rtyb yas ta te e m pl oy e e doe s notc ons t i tut e avi ol a t i on of the pr oc e dur a l r e qui r e m e nt s of the D ue P r oc e s s C l aus e of

the F ourt e e nth A m e ndm e nti f am e ani ngf

ul pos t de pr i va t i on r e m e d yf o rth e lo s s is a v a ilab le .” ) ; B arne t t v . C e ntoni , 31 F . 3d 81 3, 81 6 (9th C i r. 1 9 9 4 ) ( p ercu riam ) ( “[A ] n eg li g en t o r in ten ti o n al d ep riv atio n o f ap riso n er ’s p ro p erty fai l s t o st at e a cl ai m u n d er sect i o n 1 9 8 3 i f th e st at e h as an ad eq u at e p o st d e p r iv a tio n r e m e d y .” ) ; s e e al s o N e v. R e v. S t a t . §§ 41. 031, 41. 0322. R eber ger’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. AF F I RME D.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Eswatini National Day

# 									Eswatini National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

September 6, 2023

On behalf of the United States of America, I congratulate all Eswatini on 55 years of independence. As you mark this momentous occasion, let us also celebrate the strong friendship between our two nations. We honor our progress on health, climate change adaptation, and addressing a period of unrest. This collaboration has only strengthened the relationship between the United States and Eswatini as we hope for democratic elections followed by an inclusive national dialogue. We look forward to continued engagement on both of our country’s core values for years to come.

Please accept our congratulations on this anniversary of Eswatini’s independence.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsEswatiniOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
#### David A. ELIAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Susan JUST; Karen Scurrh; Aron Franchello; Marc Greenbaum; Anthony Summers; Sherrie Moffet; Lawrence Richman; the State of California, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 96-56855.

D.C. No. CV-96-00621-AHS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.1

Decided Feb. 21, 2001.

*429Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

1

. The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument and denies Elias’ request for oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM2

David A. Elias appeals pro se a minute order of the district court dismissing his civil rights complaint with leave to amend, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8. Because this order was neither final nor appealable, we lack jurisdiction and must dismiss the appeal. *Indian Oasis-Baboquivari Unified Sch. Dist. v. Kirk,*109 F.3d 634, 636 (9th Cir.1997) (en banc). Dismissal of the State of California due to its immunity under the Eleventh Amendment does not change this result. *Id.*

Elias’ March 25, 1997 motion for judicial notice and May 1, 1998 “motion to argument record on appeal” are denied as moot.

No further filings shall be accepted on this closed appeal. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

DISMISSED.

2

. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Merchants
Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ending June 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Janet P. Spitler, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. [SECTION]1350, as adopted
pursuant to [SECTION]906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my 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 the results of operations of the
Company.

                                       Merchants Bancshares, Inc.

                                       By: /s/ Janet P. Spitler
                                           -------------------------------
                                           Janet P. Spitler
                                           Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer


                                       August 14, 2003
                                       ---------------
                                       Date


<PAGE>
1 Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA) Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:17 PM
To: 'SALES@PRECISIONDRONE.COM' Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA); Cooper, Thuy (FAA); Schandler, Andrea (FAA) Subject: Request for Additional Information

February 25, 2015

Mr. Matt Minnes Precision Drone, LLC 22093 Prairie Baptist Road Noblesville, IN 46060

Dear Mr. Minnes:

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-1063). This information is necessary for the Fe deral Aviation Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Describe the aircraft makes and models for th e proposed UAS operation. The descriptions should include the following: size, maximu m weight (including payload), and aircraft type (i .e. - fixed-wing, rotorcraft, lighter-than-air). Pl ease include the aircraft manuals.

 Provide description of proximity to airports and to populated areas.

 Your petition references a pre-flight inspection and/or checklist. Desc ribe the process used to determine if the UAS is airworthy and in sa fe condition for operation in the NAS.

 Describe the process used to document UAS discrepanc ies and the corrective acti on taken in the aircraft record. Examples of processes incl ude (1) the petitioner has elected to use its own process to maintain its UAS and ensure that only airworthy and safe UAS will be allowed to operate in the NAS and (2) the petitioner has elected to maintain its UAS in accordance with the manufacturer maintenance and inspection recommendations.

 Your petition references the materials listed below, however the materials were not submitted for the record. Please provide a copy of the following referenced materials:

o Precision Drones User Manual

o Flight Manual

o Operating Handbook

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Hea dquarters or electronically via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov . If you want us to process your request a ny further, we must receive the information described above by March 11, 2015. If we do not receiv e the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.2 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Nia Daniels Program Analyst
§ 435.2 Purpose and applicability. This part sets forth, for the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa— ( a ) The eligibility provisions that a State plan must contain;
( b ) The mandatory and optional groups of individuals to whom Medicaid is provided under a State plan;
( c ) The eligibility requirements and procedures that the Medicaid agency must use in determining and redetermining eligibility, and requirements it may not use;
( d ) The availability of FFP for providing Medicaid and for administering the eligibility provisions of the plan; and
( e ) Other requirements concerning eligibility determinations, such as use of an institutionalized individual's income for the cost of care.
[43 FR 45204, Sept. 29, 1978, as amended at 44 FR 17937, Mar. 23, 1979; 51 FR 41350, Nov. 14, 1986]
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 170 (Thursday, September 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45648-45649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-21262]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

United States Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2009-0761]


Cook Inlet Regional Citizen's Advisory Committee; Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Recertification.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has recertified the Cook Inlet Regional 
Citizen's Advisory Council for the period covering September 1, 2009, 
through August 31, 2010. Under the Oil Terminal and Oil Tanker 
Environmental Oversight Act of 1990, the Coast Guard may certify on an 
annual basis an alternative voluntary advisory group in lieu of a 
regional citizens' advisory council for Cook Inlet, Alaska. This 
advisory group monitors the activities of terminal facilities and crude 
oil tankers under the Cook Inlet Program established by the statute.

DATES: The Cook Inlet Regional Citizen's Advisory Council is certified 
through August 31, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may request a copy of the recertification letter by 
writing to Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard District (dpi), P.O. Box 
25517, Juneau, AK 99802-5517; or by calling 907-463-2821.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant-Commander Ken Phillips, 
Seventeenth Coast Guard District (dpi), telephone 907-463-2821.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background and Purpose

    On September 1, 2008, the Coast Guard recertified the Cook Inlet 
Regional Citizen's Advisory Council through August 31, 2009 (73 FR 
57127). Under the Oil Terminal and Oil Tanker Environmental Oversight 
Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 2732), the Coast Guard may certify, on an annual 
basis, an alternative voluntary advisory group in lieu of a regional 
citizens' advisory council for Cook Inlet, Alaska. This advisory group 
monitors the activities of terminal facilities and crude oil tankers 
under the Cook Inlet Program established by Congress, 33 U.S.C. 2732 
(b).
    On September 16, 2002, the Coast Guard published a notice of policy 
on revised recertification procedures for alternative voluntary 
advisory groups in lieu of councils at Cook Inlet, Alaska (67 FR 
58440). This revised policy indicated that Cook Inlet Regional 
Citizen's Advisory Council recertification in 2009 need only submit a 
streamlined

[[Page 45649]]

application and public comments would not be solicited prior to that 
recertification.

    Dated: August 14, 2009.
Christopher C. Colvin,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventeenth Coast Guard 
District.
[FR Doc. E9-21262 Filed 9-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-P
§ 424.109 Payment to the beneficiary. Medicare pays the beneficiary for emergency services if the following conditions are met: ( a ) The hospital does not have in effect an election to claim payment.
( b ) The beneficiary, or someone on his or her behalf, submits— ( 1 ) A claim that meets the requirements of § 424.32;
( 2 ) An itemized hospital bill; and
( 3 ) Evidence requested by CMS to establish that the services meet the requirements of this subpart.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Issuance of Executive Order on Bolstering Ongoing Efforts to Bring Hostages and Wrongfully Detained U.S. Nationals Home

# 									Issuance of Executive Order on Bolstering Ongoing Efforts to Bring Hostages and Wrongfully Detained U.S. Nationals Home							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

July 19, 2022

We continue to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to bring home U.S. nationals held hostage or wrongfully detained abroad. Today, the President signed a new executive order (E.O.), which builds on the Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act, to provide the U.S. government expanded tools to deter and disrupt hostage-taking and wrongful detentions.

When Americans are taken captive abroad, we must do everything in our power to secure their release. The President, National Security Advisor Sullivan, and I have spoken to families who are meeting the extraordinary challenge of advocating for a loved one held captive. I am grateful for their partnership, and we are all humbled by their courage. This E.O. prioritizes U.S. government support for families and instructs U.S. officials to expeditiously share relevant information and strategies, as appropriate, for securing their loved one’s release.

The sanctions authority included in this E.O. enables the United States to impose financial and travel sanctions on those who are responsible for unjustly holding U.S. nationals, whether their captor is a terrorist network or a state actor.

In a parallel effort, the State Department is also introducing a new risk indicator to our Travel Advisories – the “D” indicator. This new indicator warns U.S. citizens of the risk of wrongful detention by a foreign government. We are adding this indicator to highlight the elevated risk of wrongful detention in particular countries that have regularly engaged in this practice.

The U.S. Department of State has no higher priority than the safety and security of U.S. nationals overseas. Today’s E.O. and “D” indicator demonstrate that commitment, and we will continue to be relentless in our efforts to reunite Americans who are held hostage or wrongfully detained with their loved ones.

Tags

Hostage RecoveryOffice of the SpokespersonSanctionsSecurityOffice of the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs

Back to Top
§ 438.356 State contract options for external quality review. ( a ) The State— ( 1 ) Must contract with one EQRO to conduct either EQR alone or EQR and other EQR-related activities.
( 2 ) May contract with additional EQROs or other entities to conduct EQR-related activities as set forth in § 438.358.
( b ) Each EQRO must meet the competence requirements as specified in § 438.354(b).
( c ) Each EQRO is permitted to use subcontractors. The EQRO is accountable for, and must oversee, all subcontractor functions.
( d ) Each EQRO and its subcontractors performing EQR or EQR-related activities must meet the requirements for independence, as specified in § 438.354(c).
( e ) For each contract with an EQRO described in paragraph (a) of this section, the State must follow an open, competitive procurement process that is in accordance with State law and regulations. In addition, the State must comply with 45 CFR part 75 as it applies to State procurement of Medicaid services.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3546 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3546

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey the Walhalla National 
             Fish Hatchery to the State of South Carolina.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 29, 1996

  Mr. Graham introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey the Walhalla National 
             Fish Hatchery to the State of South Carolina.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Walhalla National Fish Hatchery 
Conveyance Act''.

SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF WALHALLA NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY TO THE STATE OF 
              SOUTH CAROLINA.

    (a) Conveyance Requirement.--Within 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall convey to 
the State of South Carolina without reimbursement all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to the property described in 
subsection (b), for use by the South Carolina Department of Natural 
Resources as part of the State of South Carolina fish culture program.
    (b) Property Described.--The property referred to in subsection (a) 
is the property known as the Walhalla National Fish Hatchery, located 
on Indian Camp Creek and the East Fork of Chattooga River off of State 
Secondary Highway 325 in northern Oconee County, South Carolina, 
consisting of 76.2 acres (more or less), all improvements and related 
personal property under the control of the Secretary that is located on 
that property, including buildings, structures, and equipment, and all 
easements, leases, and water rights relating to that property.
    (c) Use and Reversionary Interest.--The property conveyed to the 
State of South Carolina pursuant to this section shall be used by the 
State for purposes of fishery resources management, and if it is used 
for any other purpose all right, title, and interest in and to all 
property conveyed pursuant to this section shall revert to the United 
States.
                                 <all>
```
§ 426.431 ALJ's review of the LCD to apply the reasonableness standard. ( a ) *Required steps.* To review the provision(s) listed in the aggrieved party's complaint based on the reasonableness standard, an ALJ must: ( 1 ) Confine the LCD review to the provision(s) of the LCD raised in the aggrieved party's complaint.
( 2 ) Conduct a hearing, unless the matter can be decided on the written record.
( 3 ) Close the LCD review record to the taking of evidence.
( 4 ) Treat as precedential any previous Board decision under § 426.482 that involves the same LCD provison(s), same specific issue and facts in question, and the same clinical conditions.
( 5 ) Issue a decision as described in § 426.447.
( b ) *Optional steps.* The ALJ may do the following to apply the reasonableness standard to the provision(s) listed in the aggrieved party's complaint: ( 1 ) Consult with appropriate scientific or clinical experts concerning evidence.
( 2 ) Consider any previous ALJ decision made under § 426.447 regarding the same provision(s) of the LCD under review and for the same clinical conditions.
( c ) *Authority for ALJs in LCD reviews when applying the reasonableness standard.* In applying the reasonableness standard to a provision (or provisions) of an LCD, the ALJ must follow all applicable laws, regulations, rulings, and NCDs.
Editorial Note on Part 422
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 422 appear at 70 FR 4741, Jan. 28, 2005.

§ 422.527 Agreements with Federally qualified health centers. The contract between the MA organization and CMS must specify that— ( a ) The MA organization must pay a Federally qualified health center (FQHC) a similar amount to what it pays other providers for similar services.
( b ) Under such a contract, the FQHC must accept this payment as payment in full, except for allowable cost sharing which it may collect.
( c ) Financial incentives, such as risk pool payments or bonuses, and financial withholdings are not considered in determining the payments made by CMS under § 422.316(a).
[70 FR 4738, Jan. 28, 2005]
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Henry MARTIN v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 56561.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 12, 1975.

In re: Henry Martin applying for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Certiorari.

Writ denied. Based on evidentiary hearing of November 25, 1974, as ordered by 302 So.2d 304 (La.1974), we agree with the trial court’s conclusion that the applicant did not bear his burden of proving ineffectiveness of trial counsel. Cf. King v. Beto, 429 F.2d 221 (C.A. 5, 1970).
No. 99-2036.

#### Good News Club et al. *v.*Milford Central School.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.