alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 1 2

- 00 0225

- CR
IN RE David Cepeda JONES Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Delivered and Filed: April 25, 2012
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On April 18, 2012, Relator David Cepeda Jones filed a petition for writ of mandamus complaining that the H onorable Philip Kazen interfered with his Sixth Amendment rights by changing his court appointed counsel without his consent. The record reflects that on April 30, 2010, appointed trial counsel, Rochelle Acevedo, was replaced by appointed counsel Charles Bunk. Because a criminal defendant does not have the right to appointed counsel of choice, we deny the requested relief. The right of the accused to counsel, both at trial and on appeal, is fundamental. Gideon v. Wainwright , 372 U.S. 335, 344 (1963) ; Th omas v. State , 550 S.W.2d 68 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977). Although an indigent defendant does not have the right to appointed counsel of his choice, a trial

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2009

- CR

- 12902 , styled State of Te xas v. David Cepeda Jones , in the 227 th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Philip Kazen presiding.04

- 12

- 00225

- CR

- 2

- court may not arbitrarily remove his appointed counsel that he had “grown to accept” and in
which he had gained confidence

. Stearnes v. Clinton , 780 S.W.2d 216, 225 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989); Buntion v. Harmon , 827 S.W.2d 945, 949 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992). When an attorney serves under a valid appointment by the court, an attorney

- client relationship has bee n established and the court may not arbitrarily remove the attorney over the objections of both the
defendant and his counsel. Stearnes , 780 S.W.2d at 221, 225; see also Buntion , 827 S.W.2d at 949. Although Relator has indicated his choice to maintain th e relationship with his previous attorney, he has failed to bring forward any evidence that said counsel objected to her replacement. See Stearnes , 780 S.W.2d at 221; Buntion , 827 S.W.2d at 949. Accordingly, Relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is de nied.
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
<TABLE>
                                                                   Exhibit 11
                            Rymer Foods Inc.
                    Computation of Earnings Per Share
       for the periods ended October 31, 1998 and October 25, 1997
                  (in thousands, except per share data)

                                         Fiscal Year           One Period
                                            Ending                Ending
                                           Oct. 31,              Oct. 25,
                                             1998                  1997 
                                       Basic     Diluted      Basic     Diluted
                                      ------     ------      ------     ------
<S>                                 <C>        <C>         <C>        <C>
AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING
1 Average shares outstanding           4,300      4,300       4,300      4,300
2 Net additional shares outstanding  
  assuming exercise of stock       
  options*                               -           -           -          -
3 Net additional shares assuming
  conversion of preferred stock not
  considered a common stock
  equivalent at issuance                 -           -           -          -
                                      ------     ------      ------     ------
4 Average number of common
  shares outstanding                   4,300      4,300       4,300      4,300 
                                      ======     ======      ======     ======

EARNINGS
5 Loss from continuing operations   $ (2,017)  $ (2,017)   $   (113)  $   (113)
                                      ======     ======      ======     ======

6 Net loss                          $ (2,017)  $ (2,017)   $   (113)  $   (113)
                                      ======     ======      ======     ======

PER SHARE AMOUNTS
  Loss from continuing operations        
   (line 5 / line 4)                $  (0.47)  $  (0.47)   $  (0.03)  $  (0.03)
                                      ======     ======      ======     ======
  Net loss        
   (line 6 / line 4)                $  (0.47)  $  (0.47)   $  (0.03)  $  (0.03)
                                      ======     ======      ======     ======


Note:  Earnings per share amounts for all other reporting periods as it
       relates to  the predecessor company is not meaningful due to the
       reorganization.

     * Since there is a net loss, common  stock equivalents are excluded
       from the diluted  earnings  per  share  calculations  since  they
       would be antidilutive.


</TABLE>
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed 

August 13, 2019.

In The 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00602-CR

IN RE CHARLES GRABOW JR., Relator 

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING 

WRIT OF MANDAMUS 

 208th District Court 

Harris County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 1303690 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

On August 1, 2019, relator Charles Grabow Jr. filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus in this court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (Supp.); see also Tex. 

R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Harris County 

District Clerk to transmit certain documents and records to relator, including a 

transcript of relator’s trial.
2 

This court’s mandamus jurisdiction is governed by section 22.221 of the 

Texas Government Code. A court of appeals may issue writs of mandamus against 

(1) a judge of a district, statutory county, statutory probate county, or county court 

in the court of appeals district; (2) a judge of a district court who is acting as a 

magistrate at a court of inquiry under Chapter 52 of the Texas Code of Criminal 

Procedure in the court of appeals district; or (3) an associate judge of a district or 

county court appointed by a judge under Chapter 201 of the Texas Family Code in 

the court of appeals district for the judge who appointed the associate judge. Tex. 

Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221(b). The courts of appeals also may issue all writs 

necessary to enforce the court of appeals’ jurisdiction. Id. § 22.221(a).

The Harris County District Clerk is not among the parties specified in section 

22.221(b). Moreover, relator has not shown that the issuance of a writ compelling 

the requested relief is necessary to enforce this court’s appellate jurisdiction. See id. 

§ 22.221(a). Therefore, we lack jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against the 

Harris County District Clerk in this case.

Accordingly, we dismiss relator’s petition for writ of mandamus for lack of 

jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM 

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Wise and Hassan.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 31156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12220]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. MT00-7-000]


K N Wattenberg Transmission Limited Liability Co.; Notice of 
Tariff Filing

May 10, 2000.
    Take notice that on May 4, 2000 K N Wattenberg Transmission Limited 
Liability Co. (KNWT) tendered for filing revisions to its FERC Gas 
Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 2, Second 
Revised Sheet No. 63, and First Revised Sheet No. 64.
    KNWT states that on April 5, 2000 Kinder Morgan, Inc. (KMI) closed 
on a transaction with ONEOK, Inc. (ONEOK) whereby various assets and 
entities were transferred to ONEOK, including all entities that were 
then marketing affiliates of KMIGT. As a result of the transaction, KMI 
states that it no longer has a marketing affiliate and is revising the 
tariff accordingly.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at hppt://
www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-12220 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4877 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4877

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a refundable 
               tax credit to help middle class taxpayers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             October 26 (legislative day, October 19), 2020

 Ms. Cortez Masto introduced the following bill; which was read twice 
                and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to establish a refundable 
               tax credit to help middle class taxpayers.

    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 ``Rebuild Americans' Income to 
Strengthen and Empower Working Families Act'' or ``RAISE Working 
Families Act''.

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF MIDDLE CLASS TAX CREDIT.

    (a) In General.--Subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after 
section 36 the following new section:

``SEC. 36A. MIDDLE CLASS TAX CREDIT.

    ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an eligible individual, 
there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this 
subtitle for the taxable year an amount equal to the lesser of--
            ``(1) $500 ($1,000 in the case of eligible individuals 
        filing a joint return), or
            ``(2) the earned income (as defined in section 32(c)(2)) of 
        the taxpayer for the taxable year.
    ``(b) Limitation Based on Modified Adjusted Gross Income.--The 
amount of the credit allowed by subsection (a) (determined without 
regard to this subsection) for any taxable year shall be reduced (but 
not below zero) by 2.5 percent of so much of the taxpayer's modified 
adjusted gross income (as defined in section 24(b)(1)) as exceeds 
$50,000 ($100,000 in the case of a joint return).
    ``(c) Eligible Individual.--For purposes of this section, the term 
`eligible individual' has the same meaning given such term under 
section 6428(d).
    ``(d) Treatment of Possessions.--Rules similar to the rules of 
subsection (c) of section 2201 of the CARES Act (Public Law 116-136) 
shall apply for purposes of this section.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendments.--
            (1) Section 6211(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
        1986 is amended by inserting ``36A,'' after ``36,''.
            (2) The table of sections for subpart C of part IV of 
        subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting 
        after the item relating to section 36 the following new item:

``Sec. 36A. Middle Class Tax Credit.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2019.
                                 <all>
```
#### GIBSON v. MOSELY, HENDERSON & DAVIS REALTY CO.

(Decided November 28, 1916.)

Appeal from Birmingham City Court.

Heard before Hon. H. A. Sharpe.

J. H. Ward, for appellant.

No counsel marked for appellee.

Per curiam.

Appeal dismissed by appellant.
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 99(b)


              Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63
                      Of Title 18 of the United States Code


I, Susan Tomasky, the chief financial officer of

                      American Electric Power Company, Inc.
                             AEP Generating Company
                            AEP Texas Central Company
                             AEP Texas North Company
                            Appalachian Power Company
                         Columbus Southern Power Company
                         Indiana Michigan Power Company
                             Kentucky Power Company
                               Ohio Power Company
                       Public Service Company of Oklahoma
                       Southwestern Electric Power Company

(the "Companies"),  certify that (i) the Annual Reports of the Companies on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Reports")  fully comply with the
requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934
and (ii) the  information  contained  in the  Reports  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Companies.

/s/ Susan Tomasky

Susan Tomasky

March 20, 2003
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket No. RP00-21-003]

Take notice that on April 17, 2000, CNG Transmission Corporation (CNG) submitted a compliance filing and a request for modification of the schedule for submission of tariff sheets.

CNG states that its filing was in compliance with the Commission's “Order on Technical Conference” issued March 31, 2000 in Docket No. RP00-21-000 related to CNG's Rate Schedules DPO (Delivery Point Operator) and CSC (City Gas Swing Customer) program. CNG explained certain specific provisions of its Rate Schedule FTNN as requested in the Commission's order. CNG did not file revised tariff sheets in compliance with the order because, it explains, it has not yet determined whether it can go forward with the program as modified by the order. CNG  proposes that it will file the requisite tariff sheets at least ten days in advance of the date that it proposes to more the sheets into effect. 

CNG states that copies of the filing have been mailed to all parties set out on the official service list in Docket No. RP00-21. 

Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed on or before May 17, 2000. Protests will be considered by Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/​online/​rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

David P. Boergers,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-12228 Filed 5-15-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Anders G. Arnheim et al., Appellants, v John Prozeralik et al., Respondents.

[697 NYS2d 431]

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendants met their burden of establishing their entitlement to judgment dismissing the slander causes of action by presenting proof in admissible form that none of the alleged defamatory statements was made *(see, Schwartz v Society of N. Y. Hosp.,*232 AD2d 212, 213; *Scaccia v Dolch,*231 AD2d 885; *Barber v Daly,*185 AD2d 567, 569). The assertions of plaintiffs’ attorney that the alleged defamatory statements were reported to him are “mere hearsay and insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact” *(Barber v Daly, supra,*at 570; *see, Snyder v Sony Music Entertainment,*252 AD2d 294, 298-299; *Memory Gardens v D’Amico,*91 AD2d 1159, 1160).

The court also properly granted defendants’ motion insofar as it sought summary judgment dismissing the remaining cause of action, alleging prima facie tort. That cause of action, based upon the initiation of a lawsuit against plaintiff Anders G. Arnheim by defendant JPE Holdings, Inc., has no merit *(see, Drago v Buonagurio,*46 NY2d 778, 779-780; *T. N. J. Holding Corp. v Biaggi, Ehrlich & Lang,*90 AD2d 547). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cosgrove, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Hayes, Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Bank Secrecy Act

              														Bank Secrecy Act, October 26, 1970.						https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/1025,			accessed on August 26, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 12, 2022

No. 04-22-00292-CR

David CASTILLO, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 365th Judicial District Court, Zavala County, Texas

Trial Court No. 20-01-003847-ZCRAJA

Honorable Amado J. Abascal III, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The reporter’s record was due on July 11, 2022. Ms. Patricia Salinas is the court reporter 

responsible for preparing, certifying, and filing the reporter’s record in this appeal. On July 7, 

2022, Ms. Salinas filed a Notification of Late Record requesting an additional thirty days to file 

the reporter’s record. The request is GRANTED. Ms. Salinas is ORDERED to file the reporter’s 

record no later than August 5, 2022.

_________________________________

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

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

court on this 12th day of July, 2022.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 15(a)**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers

We  hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in Rhodia’s Registration  Statements on Form S-8 (Registration n° 333-12200 and 333-124813) of our  report dated April 10, 2006 relating to Rhodia’s financial statements that  appear in Rhodia’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December  31, 2005.

 

| /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers   |  |  |  |
|------------------------------|--|--|--|
| ***PricewaterhouseCoopers*** |  |  |  |
| Paris, France                |  |  |  |
| April 10,          2006      |  |  |  |

 

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-29-1997
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-1997
<CASH>                                             381
<SECURITIES>                                        25
<RECEIVABLES>                                      441
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,354
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 7,733
<PP&E>                                          10,768
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,028
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  14,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,602
<BONDS>                                          2,121
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              980
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           486
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,606
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    14,286
<SALES>                                         31,437
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,437
<CGS>                                           24,390
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,390
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 453
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    330
<INCOME-TAX>                                        68
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                231
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (451)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (220)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.45)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.35)
        

</TABLE>