alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United Stat es District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 11-1227

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Southern * District of Iowa. Gabriel Crivello, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: September 20, 2011 Filed: September 20, 2011

___________ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Gabriel Crivello appeals from the district court’s 1 denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). His couns el has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and has moved to withdraw.-2- We conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Crivello’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, because Crivello did not present a fair and just reason for withdrawing his plea. SeeUnited States v. Alvarado , 615 F.3d 916, 920 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review; after court accepts gu ilty plea, defendant may still withdraw plea before sentence is imposed if defendant can show fair and just reason for requesting withdrawal); United States v. Bahena , 223 F.3d 797, 806-07 (8th Cir. 2000) (when defendant stated at plea heari ng that he understood, his later conclusory claim that he did not understand rings hollow); United States v. Morrison , 967 F.2d 264, 268 (8th Cir. 1992) (“When a defendant has entered a knowing and voluntary plea of guilty at a hearing at which he acknowledged committing the crime, ‘the occasion for setting aside a guilty plea should seldom arise.’” (citation omitted)).
Having reviewed the record i ndependently under Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.

______________________________
#### § 1203.404 Handling of unprocessed data.

It is the usual practice to withhold the release of raw scientific data received from spacecraft until it can be calibrated, correlated and properly interpreted by the experimenter under the monitorship of the cognizant NASA office. During this process, the data are withheld through administrative measures, and it is not necessary to resort to security classification to prevent premature release. However, if at any time during the processing of raw data it becomes apparent that the results require protection under the criteria set forth in this subpart D, it is the responsibility of the cognizant NASA office to obtain the appropriate security classification.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

November 20, 2012

d1113

Order 

November 20, 2012

144685(33)

AVERN BURNSIDE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 144685

COA: 306913

Genesee CC: 09-025749-FC

GENESEE CIRCUIT JUDGE,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 25, 2012 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A0131. JEFFREY COX v. THE STATE.

Jeffrey Cox was convicted of murder and possession of a firearm during the

commission of a crime, and his convictions were affirmed on appeal. Cox v. State,

279 Ga. 223 (610 SE2d 521) (2005). He later filed an extraordinary motion for new

trial, which the trial court denied. Cox now appeals to this Court.

Under our Constitution, however, the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction

over “[a]ll casesin which a sentence of death wasimposed or could be imposed.” See

Ga. Const. of 1983, Art. VI, Sec. VI, Par. III (8). Because a penalty of death can be

imposed for the crime of murder, jurisdiction is proper in the Supreme Court. See

OCGA § 17-10-30 (b); Neal v. State, 290 Ga. 563, 572 (722 SE2d 765) (2012)

(Hunstein, J., concurring); see also State v. Thornton, 253 Ga. 524 (322 SE2d 711)

(1984) (directing this Court to transfer “all cases in which either a sentence of death

or of life imprisonment has been imposed upon conviction of murder”). Accordingly,

this appeal is hereby TRANSFERRED to the Supreme Court for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

09/19/2014

September 19, 2014
Rights-Of-Way 

Exclusion Areas

Alternative B

0 2 4 8 12 16 20

Miles

Map 73

T9N

Harlowton

Roundup

T5N

 ̈¦§

Pompeys

 Pillar

Big Timber

Billings

§ ̈¦

T2 Columbus S  ̈¦§

Bridger

T8S

R18E R29E Montana

R103W R93W Wyoming

T

57N

Wyoming

Location Map

Montana

Billings 

Field

Office

Ü

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

Billings & Pompeys Pillar 

National Monument RMP / EIS

Legend

Map scale 1:900,000

Map generated by the Billings Field Office in July 2011

Albers Equal Area, NAD83 Projection

This map is intended for display purposes. No warranty is made by the Bureau of

Land Management as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the data for

individual or aggregate use with other data, or for purposes not intended by BLM. 

This map may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was

developed through digital means and information may be updated without notification.

State Border

Planning Area Boundary

Exclusion Areas

Interstate

Highway

^_ Towns

Public Lands Survey System

94

90

90
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24349-1 Filed:05/22/23 Entered:05/30/23 11:40:28 Desc:

Exhibit Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3537 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3537

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
185 State Street in Manhattan, Illinois, as the ``Army Pvt. Shawn Pahnke 
                        Manhattan Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 185 
State Street in Manhattan, Illinois, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Army Pvt. Shawn Pahnke Manhattan Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Army Pvt. Shawn Pahnke 
Manhattan Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 4.15

                                 HOLDER JOINDER

     By execution of this Holder Joinder, the undersigned agrees to become a
party to that certain Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of November 9,
2000 (as the same may be amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise  modified
from time to time, the "Registration Rights Agreement"), between Spanish
Broadcasting System, Inc. and the other persons from time to time party thereto.
The undersigned shall have all the rights, and shall observe all of the
obligations, applicable to a Holder (as defined in the Registration Rights
Agreement).

Name: The Liberman Irrevocable Trust


Address for Notices:                          with copies to:
18737 Hatteras Street, #51                            N/A
Tarzana, California 91356
Telephone: 818-343-1186
Fax: 818-343-4567
                                              Signature:/s/ Jason J. Liberman
                                                            Trustee
Date: 2/26/01
#### Roney *v.*City of Florala.

*Violating Municipal Ordinance.*

(Decided April 23, 1914.

65 South. 91.)

*Municipal Corporation; Violating of Ordinance; Jurisdiction of City Court.*— The jurisdiction of the City Court of Andalusia of offenses for violating municipal ordinances is appellate only, and where the record does not show a conviction in the municipal court, and an appeal from such conviction to the city court, no such jurisdiction is shown in the city court as will authorize this court to review the judgment, such judgment being a nullity, for want of jurisdiction.

Appeal from Andalusia City Court.

Heard before Hon. Ed. T. Albritton.

Complaint by tbe city of Florala against Mrs. T. J. . Roney for violating a municipal ordinance. From a judgment of conviction tbe defendant appeals.

Appeal dismissed.

A. Wi-ialey, for appellant.

The court does not take judicial knowledge of tbe substance or terms of tbe ordinance referred to in tbe *complaint.*— Goldthwaite *v.*Montgomery, 50 Ala. 86; *Brown v.*Mayer, 23 Ala. 722. Tbe jurisdiction of tbe city court of Andalusia in prosecutions for violations of a municipal ordinance is appellate only and as there is nothing in tbe record to show a former conviction in tbe mayor’ court, and an appeal to tbe city court therefrom, tbe judgment in tbe city court is a mere *nullity.*— Brown *v.*Mayor, *supra; Jackson v.*State, 91 Ala. 55; sec. 7565, Code 1907; 11 Ene. P. & P. 838, 861 and 861.

L. H. Brassell, and G. W. Reeves, for appellee.

No brief reached tbe Reporter.

*371THOMAS, J.

While it seems that the demurrers to the complaint are without merit *(Turner v. Town of Lineville,*2 Ala. App. 455, 56 South. 603; *Rosenberg v. City of Selma,*168 Ala. 195, 52 South. 742; *Goldthwaite v. City Council of Montgomery,*50 Ala. 486; *Kennamer v. State,*150 Ala. 74, 43 South. 482), this being the real point attempted to be raised by the record, yet we refrain from a decision of the question, since we are without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The complaint mentioned Avas one filed in the Andalusia city court of law and equity, charging a violation of an ordinance of the city of Florala. The said Andalusia city court of laAV and equity has no jurisdiction of an offense in violation of the ordinances of the city of Florala except upon an appeal after a conviction before the recorder of the city of Florala. There is nothing! in the record before us shoAAdng such a conviction and appeal. For aught appearing to the contrary, the prosecution was originally commenced in the said Andalusia city court of laAV and equity. If so, its judgment of conviction here appealed from is a nullity for want of jurisdiction of the subject-matter, and will not support this *appeal.*— Central *of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Coursen,*8 Ala. App. 590, 62 South. 977, and authorities cited. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Captain *v.*The State.

*Violating Prohibition Law.*

(Decided February 3, 1914.

Rehearing denied February 11, 1914.

64 South. 639.)

*Intoxicating Liquors; Unlawful Possession; Affidavit; Jurisdiction.*— Under section 32, Acts 1909, p. 92, a prosecution for violating the prohibition law, in the absence of an objection in the circuit court, may proceed to judgment upon the affidavit, without the filing of a statement of the cause of complaint, as required by section 6730, Code 1907, in trials de novo in that court; and the affidavit being sufficient in form and substance, gave the court jurisdiction.

Appeal from Barbour Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. M. Sollie.

Sarah Captain was convicted of violating the prohibition law and she appeals.

Affirmed.

C. S. McDowdell, Jr., for appellant.

No statement was filed by the solicitor of the cause of complaint, and there was no waiver of filing *thereof.*— Moss *v. State,*42 Ala. 546; *Spicer v. State,*69 Ala. 163; *McGhee v. State,*22 South. 113; sec. 6730, Code 1907; *Haynes v. State,*5 Ala. App. 167. Counsel discusses other assignments of error, but Avithout citation of authority.

B. C. Bricicell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Section 6730, Code 1907, is not applicable to trials for violation of the prohibition laAV, it having been superseded by section 32, Acts 1909, p. *92.*— Fitzpatrick *v. State,*169 Ala. 1; *Sapp v. State,*2 Ala. App. 190. The evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for the offense *charged.*— Wright *v. State,*156 Ala. 108; *Turner v. State,*99 Ala. 57; *Grant v. State,*97 Ala. 35.

*168THOMAS, J.

The failure of the solicitor to file a statement as required by section 6730 of the Code is urged as error; but it was field, in tfie case of *Anna Lee v. State, infra,*64 South. 637, not to constitute sucfi wfiere, as fiere, tfie prosecution was for a violation of tfie prohibition laws, and was begun by affidavit and warrant, and tfiere was no objection in tfie lower court to tfie failure of tfie solicitor to file sucfi statement. Tfie affidavit, upon wfiicfi tfie trial was fiad without objection, followed tfie form prescribed by law for charging tfie offense. Under section 32 of tfie Fuller Bill, this was sufficient to sustain tfie jurisdiction of tfie circuit *court.*— Anna *Lee v. State, infra,*64 South. 637.

Tfie other questions raised by tfie record are so clearly without merit that they are not insisted upon in brief, are neither new nor novel, and are not of sucfi interest as to require discussion.

Tfie judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24349 Filed:05/22/23 Entered:05/30/23 11:40:28 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24349 Filed:05/22/23 Entered:05/30/23 11:40:28 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 3
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24349 Filed:05/22/23 Entered:05/30/23 11:40:28 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 3
1

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

Filed: March 9, 2017

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

JAMES WOODWARD, * UNPUBLISHED OPINION

*

Petitioner, * No. 15-1130V

*

v. * Special Master Gowen

* 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Decision on Joint Stipulation;

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Tetanus-Diphtheria-Acellular

* Pertussis (TDaP);

Respondent. * Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS)

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Amber Diane Wilson, Maglio Christopher and Toale, PA, Washington, DC for petitioner.

Camille Michelle Collett, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC for respondent.

DECISION ON JOINT STIPULATION1

On October 6, 2015, James Woodward (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation 

under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq2[the 

“Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. Petitioner alleges that he developed Guillain-Barré Syndrome 

(“GBS”) as a result of a tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“TDaP”) vaccine received on or 

about February 23, 2015. Stipulation (ECF No. 46), ¶¶ 1, 2, 4. 

On March 8, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation recommending an award of 

compensation to petitioner. Stipulation (ECF No. 460. Respondent denies that the TDaP 

immunization is the cause of petitioner’s alleged GBS or any other injury or condition. 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I 

intend to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and 

Promotion of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner 

has 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other information, the disclosure of which 

would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified 

material fits within this definition, I will delete such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, 

for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 

42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).
2

Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as Appendix A. The 

undersigned finds the stipulation reasonable and adopts it as the decision of the Court in 

awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

The parties stipulate that petitioner shall receive the following compensation: 

1) A lump sum of $345,000.00, in the form of a check payable to petitioner, Mr. 

James Woodward.

This amount represents compensation for all damages that would be available under 42 

U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a). Joint Stipulation at ¶ 8.

The undersigned approves the requested amount for petitioner’s compensation. 

Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in accordance with the 

parties’ stipulation.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Thomas L. Gowen 

Thomas L. Gowen

Special Master

 

3 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), entry of judgment can be expedited by each party filing a notice 

renouncing the right to seek review.
(LOGO) HOMESIDE LENDING, INC.

October 16, 1998

Ms. Kimberly J. Wiggins
Contracts & Comp. Administrator
Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.
11000 Broken Land Parkway
Columbia, MD 21044-3562

Officer's Certificate
Fiscal Year Ending 9/30/98

Dear Ms. Wiggins:

As an officer of HomeSide Lending, Inc. (HomeSide),  I certify to the best of my
knowledge to the following for the 1998 fiscal year:

1.   I have reviewed the activities and performance of the servicing activities
     of HomeSide during the preceding  fiscal year under the terms of the
     Servicing Agreement, Trust  Agreement, Pooling  and  Servicing  Agreement
     and/or Seller/Servicer Guide and to the best of my knowledge, HomeSide  has
     fulfilled all of its duties,  responsibilities  or obligations  under these
     agreements  throughout such year, or if there has been a default or failure
     of HomeSide to perform any of such duties, responsibilities or obligations,
     a description  of each default or failure and the nature and status thereof
     has been reported to Norwest Bank Minnesota, N.A.;

2.   I have  confirmed  that  HomeSide is  currently  an approved  FNMA or FHLMC
     servicer in good standing;

3.   I have confirmed that the fidelity bond, the errors and omissions insurance
     policy  and any other  bonds  required  under  the  terms of the  Servicing
     Agreement,   Trust  Agreement,   Pooling  and  Servicing  Agreement  and/or
     Seller/Servicer Guide are in full force and effect;

4.   All premiums for each hazard insurance  policy,  flood insurance policy (if
     applicable) and primary mortgage  insurance  policy (if  applicable),  with
     respect  to each  mortgaged  property,  have  been  paid  and that all such
     insurance  policies are in full force and effect;

5.   All real estate  taxes,  governmental  assessments  and any other  expenses
     accrued and due, that if not paid could result in a lien or  encumbrance on
     any mortgaged property, have been paid as and when due.

6.   All custodial accounts have been reconciled and are properly funded; and

7.   All annual reports of  Foreclosure  and  Abandonment  of Mortgage  Property
     required per Section 6050H,  6050J and 6050P of the Internal  Revenue Code,
     respectively, have been prepared and filed.


Sincerely,

Terry Salazar
Vice President

lp


Post Office Box 44090, Jacksonville, FL 32231-4090 * 904-281-3000
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

as representative of 

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, et al.,

Debtors

 

PROMESA

Title III

Case No. 17 BK 3283-LTS

In re: 

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO RICO, 

as representative of 

PUERTO RICO ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY, 

Debtor

PROMESA 

Title III 

Case No. 17 BK 4780-LTS

INFORMATIVE MOTION 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT: 

COMES NOW, PV Properties, Inc. (“PV Properties”), through the undersigned counsel, 

and respectfully informs the Court that on this date PV Properties forwarded to the Financial 

Oversight and Management Board for Puerto Rico, as representative of Puerto Rico Electric 

Power Authority, its Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, through its

counsel, Hermann D. Bauer, Esq. to his email address: hermann.bauer@oneillborges.com

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the Court take notice of the above. 

San Juan, Puerto Rico this 2

nd day of May 2023

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24097 Filed:05/02/23 Entered:05/02/23 11:00:55 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: We hereby certify that on this same date we 

electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which 

will send notification of such filing to all CM/ECF participants.

s/Fernando E. Agrait 

USDC-PR 127212

701 Avenida Ponce de León

Edificio Centro de Seguros 

Oficina 414

San Juan, Puerto Rico 00907

Tel. 787-725-3390/3391

Fax: 787-724-0353

E-mail: agraitfe@agraitlawpr.com

s/Charles A. Cuprill-Hernandez

USDC-PR 114312

Charles A. Cuprill, P.S.C., Law Offices

356 Fortaleza Street - Second Floor

San Juan, PR 00901

Tel.: 787-977-0515

Fax: 787-977-0518

E-mail: cacuprill@cuprill.com

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:24097 Filed:05/02/23 Entered:05/02/23 11:00:55 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
u

thee

| 2

ss
On

2

a

\
an

ar
aoe

x

RS

.

F
5

Pacific _#3

aa,
y

31

Wie

ES

Prineville District

Upper Deschutes

Legend

Interim Guidance for Motorized Use
of Existing Roads and Trails *

BLM Routes Available for
Motorized Travel

[J Closed Year Round

Limited to Designated Roads
and Trails Year Round

Limited to Designated Roads

Only Year Round

* Management of the fand applies only to BLM
‘Administered Lands within the recreation area
boundary. This map does not distinguish
between OHV specific routes and routes
‘open to passenger vehicles.

Planning Area

La Pine Boundary,

Recreation Area

Recreation Area
Highway or County Route
Road

Administered Lands

[J Bureau of Land

Management

[__] National Forest
Ss
[SJ state of Oregon

1 0 1
[] Private / Other oe ———

MILES
1 0 1 2

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
PRINEVILLE DISTRICT

2005

Upper Deschutes
Resource Management Plan

ECECEL
KILOMETERS

RMP Map 15: Interim Guidance for Motorized Use of Existing
Roads and Trails for the La Pine Recreation Area

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy,
reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use

with other data. Original data were compiled from various sources. This
information may not meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product
was developed through digital means and may be updated without notification,

‘M05-04-02:MWw.091405