alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 19

- 00128

- CR

JIMMY WAYNE CARR, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 6th District Court Lamar County, Texas Trial Court No. 27810

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION
After David Bell, Ph

. D., testified that Jimmy Wayne Carr was competent to stand trial, the trial court found Carr guilty of assault on a public servant and sentenced him to eight years’ confinement. 1 This case was tried with eleven companion cases, which are the subject of other appeals pending before this Cou rt. In this appeal, Carr contends (1) that , since Bell’s qualifications do not appear in his report, there was insufficient evidence to find him competent to stand trial and (2) that the judgment should be modified to reflect a conviction under Section 43 .26(d) of the Texas Penal Code

. The argument raised in Carr’s first issue is based exclusively on the argument brought before this Court in the companion appeal styled Carr v. State , cause number 06

- 1 9

- 00 126

- CR. In our opinion of this date disposing of that appeal, we found that Carr did not preserve that issue for appeal. For the reasons set out in that opinion, we overrule Carr’s first issue as it applies to this appeal. In his second issue, Carr asserts that the judgment of conviction should be modified to reflect a conviction under Section 43.26(d) of the Texas Penal Code. The original judgment of conviction recites that the statute for Carr’s conviction offense was Section 43.26(a) of the Texas Penal Code. Car r argues that this was error and that the proper statute was Section 43.26(d) of the Texas Penal Code. After Carr filed his brief in this Court, the trial court entered a Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment of Conviction that recited that the statute for offense was S ection 43.26(d) of the Texas Penal

1 See T EX
. P ENAL C ODE A NN
. § 22.01(b)(1) (Supp.)

.3 Code. Clerical errors in a judgment may be corrected by a nunc pro tunc judgment. Ex parte Poe , 751 S.W.2d 873, 876 (Tex. Crim. App. 1988). Errors that do not result from judicial reasoning or determination are clerica l errors. Id

. We may not decide moot controversies. See Ex p arte Flores , 130 S.W.3d 100, 104

– 05 (Tex. App.

— El Paso 2003, pet. ref’d). “ A case becomes moot on appeal when the judgment of the appellate court can no longer have an effect on an existing con troversy or cannot affect the rights of the parties. ” Jack v. State , 149 S.W.3d 119, 123 n.10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (per curiam) (citing VE Corp. v. Ernst & Young , 860 S.W.2d 83, 84 (Tex. 1993) (per curiam))

. The trial court’s nunc pro tunc judgment provides Carr with all the relief he has requested in this issue. Thus, any judgment of this Court can have no effect on the rights of the parties. Consequently, this issue is moot. We overrule Carr’s second issue. For the reasons stated, w e a ffirm the judgment of the trial court.

Josh R. Morriss, III Chief Justice Date Submitted : December 30, 2019 Date Decided: January 9 , 2020 Do Not Publish
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 113 (Monday, June 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36893-36894]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-14709]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP00-315-000]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Company; Notice of Cash Out Report

June 6, 2000.
    Take notice that on June 1, 2000, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company 
(Koch) tendered for filing its cash-in/cash-out report for the period 
April 1, 1999 through March 31, 2000.
    Koch states that copies of this filing have been served upon Koch's 
customers, state commissions and other interested parties.
    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, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed on or 
before June 13, 2000. 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

[[Page 36894]]

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 http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-14709 Filed 6-9-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004**

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Bally Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert C. Caller,Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company,certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.Section 1350 that, to my knowledge:

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result ofoperations of the Company.

Date:  December21, 2006

/s/ Robert C. Caller

Robert C. Caller

Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

(PrincipalFinancial and Accounting Officer)

1

----
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JAMES ABERNATHY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2022-3318

[February 21, 2024]

Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Marni A. Bryson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502022CT009348.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Robert Porter, Assistant Public 

Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Anesha Worthy, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

James Deane Abernathy appeals his convictions for driving under the 

influence and a resultant condition of probation. We affirm his conviction 

and sentence but reverse the court’s imposition of a monthly cost of 

supervision. Specifically, Abernathy argues the judge erred in ordering 

him to pay a $50 monthly cost of supervision as a condition of probation 

because the judge failed to orally pronounce the special condition during 

sentencing. The State concedes the court erred in imposing the $50 

monthly cost and asks that we remand the case to allow the court to 

reduce the cost to $40 per month. We agree with the State, reverse the 

court’s imposition of a $50 monthly cost, and remand for imposition of a 

cost of $40 per month. See, e.g., Sandoval v. State, 337 So. 3d 5, 7 (Fla.

4th DCA 2022); Paris v. State, 337 So. 3d 2, 3–4 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

WARNER, CIKLIN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *
2

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### § 957.12 Transcript.

Testimony and argument at hearings shall be reported verbatim, unless the Hearing Officer otherwise orders. Transcripts of the proceedings will be made available or provided to the parties.
#### § 954.22 Continuances.

For good cause shown, continuances or extensions may be granted by the presiding officer. Similar action may be taken by the Judicial Officer when the proceeding is on appeal.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: USDAForest Service strategic plan, FY...**
 
2004-08 | 2007-12 | 2015-20
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.2: ST 8/15/
Item Number:0084 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000863954
 
June 25, 2018
**EXHIBIT
      32.3**


**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 of U-Haul International, Inc. (the
“Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2005, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Robert T. Peterson, Chief Financial Officer of U-Haul International, Inc.
      certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:




(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
      Registrant.







U-HAUL
      INTERNATIONAL, INC.,


a
      Nevada
      corporation




/s/
      Robert T. Peterson


Robert
      T.
      Peterson


*Chief
      Financial Officer*




Date:
      November 4, 2005
#### JOHN D. STARK, Appellant, *v.*ELIAS HEMSTEAD, Respondent.

■ Smeties— *discharge of—*2 *S. 8.,*380.

Where an application is made by sureties to an undertaking upon arrest, after suit brought against them, to exonerate themselves from liability, the surrender must be made under the Bevised Statutes. (2 B. S., 380; Code, § 409; *dozen*v. Walters, 55 N. Y., 304.)

Appeal from an order made at the Special Term, exonerating the sureties upon an undertaking given upon the arrest of the defendant,

*302
      *John D.*Pray, for appellant. *Jackson do*Burr, for respondent.

Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.

Present — Barnard, P. J., Tappen and Taloott, JJ.

Order reversed, with costs and disbursements.
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID** 

### 07624 **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name Description**  

### x 07624\07624_Checklist.xlsx EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook



### 07624\07624_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist 

### 07624\07624_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted 

### x 07624\07624_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07624\07624_Part B.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07624\07624_Part C.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07624\07624_Part D.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07624\07624_Part D_old.xls Plant submitted survey file 

### x 07624\07624_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file



### 07624\Certification Statement Plant ID 07624.pdf Plant certification statement 

### x 07624\GGS Response to CWA ICR follow-up questions.pdf Draft Questions for Follow Up



### 07624\Supplemental Documents\07624_Bottom Ash Diagram C3-23.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 07624\Supplemental Documents\07624_Env Report A2-3.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 07624\Supplemental Documents\07624_Fly Ash Diagram C2-31.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 07624\Supplemental Documents\07624_Map 1 A5-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### 07624\Supplemental Documents\07624_Map 2 A5-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey 

### x 07624\Supplemental Documents\07624_WB-1 A5-3.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

. 2Copyright documents are available from the docket.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT ROBERT SHELTON BLALOCK, ) DOC #U16481, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-2447 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed June 15, 2018. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Joseph A. Bulone, Judge. Robert Shelton Blalock, DOC #U16481, pro se Appellant. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cornelius C. Demps, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
LaROSE, C.J., and BADALAMENTI and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ, Concur.
NOV-18-2010 THU 03 :15 PM DNR RECLAMATION FAX N0. 8126655041 p'1 P. 02 

iQ c Rfg - -coo 9- c)(. y% o 

Indiana Department of Natural Resources 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Mallcade: 530 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Mitchell E. Daniels. Jr. . Governor 

Robert r. Carter, Jr., Director 

NOV 1 8 2010 

Re: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-~2009-0640 

To Whom it may Concern; 

The Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), Division of Reclamation is the regulatory 

authority for coat mining in the state of Indiana and implements the Indiana Abandoned Coal Mine 

Program . We are providing comments on the proposed rule regarding identification and listing of 

special wastes and disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCRs) from electric utilities, docket ID No: EPA 

HQ-RCRA-2009-0640, published on June 21, 2010, in Federal Register Volume 75, No : 118. 

We believe the Surface Mine Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) provides adequate authority 

for the adoption of regulations governing the placement of CCRs with respect to both permitted coal 

mines and abandoned coal mine reclamation projects in order to protect against adverse impacts to 

public health and the environment. We support and encourage continued evolution of regulatory 

undertakings by the federal SMCRA authority, the U.S . Department of Interior's Office of Surface Mining 

as the proper federal oversight authority of this matter at coal related sites. 

We concur with and support the October 22, 2010 comments of the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management on this rulemaklng endeavor. specifically, we do not believe regulation as 

a Subtitle C waste is necessary and base thls statement upon thousands of constituent analyses aver 

two decades Indicating the wastes are not deserving of such designation . Moreover, we are very 

concerned as to the possible "stigma" effect expressed in this letter should a Subtitle C designation 

occur. 

The placement of CCRs in coal mines is of great importance to Indiana, both from a regulatory 

perspective and as an opportunity to reclaim active and abandoned mines. The IDNR has engaged with 

EPA for over a decade in seeking appropriate approaches for the regulation of CCRs placed at coal mine 

sites. We appreciate having had that opportunity and look forward to continued dialog on this 

Important matter. Please contact me should you have questions regarding coal mine placement in 

Indiana . I can be reached at bsr:evens dnr.IN .gov or (812) 665-2207. 

sincerely, 

f 

Bruce A. Stevens, Director 

Division of Reclamation 

An I^qual Qppartunity Employer 

Printed ori Recycled Paper
Rl£D INCOURT 0CA?=£ALS 1Ml Cojr. c^Appeals district

OFFICIALNOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711



### 11/4/2015 COA No. 12-13-00260-cr 

## Hernandez, Oscar Tr. Ct. No. 17,690 PD-0736-15 

## On this day, the Appellant's Pro Se petition for discretionary review has been reiuseu. 

### Abel Acosta, Clerk 12TH COURT OF APPEALS CLERK CATHY LUSK 

### 1517W. FRONT, ROOM 354 TYLER, TX 75701 * DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL * FILE COPY
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4786 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4786

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 110 Postal Way in Carrollton, Georgia, as the ``Samuel P. Roberts 
                        Post Office Building''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4786

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 110 Postal Way in Carrollton, Georgia, as the ``Samuel P. Roberts 
                        Post Office Building''.

    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 110 
Postal Way in Carrollton, Georgia, shall be known and designated as the 
``Samuel P. Roberts Post Office Building''.

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 ``Samuel P. Roberts Post 
Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 19, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.2



Date ________________


Re:    Executive Change of Control Plan


Dear ________________:
At its recent meeting, the Compensation and Organization Committee of Board of Directors of Avista Corporation (the “Committee”) took certain actions regarding compensation and benefits, including severance payments, that may become payable to officers following the occurrence of a change of control of Avista Corporation (“Company”).  Those actions include:


		
	1.
	Effective January 1, 2020, the Company will no longer enter into individual Change of Control Agreements (“CIC Agreements”) with any officer of the Company; and 


		
	2.
	Approval of an Executive Change of Control Plan (“Plan”) that becomes effective January 1, 2020. 




Based on the terms of the Plan, the Board, in its sole discretion, determines which officers of the Company may participate in the Plan.  The Board has decided that it will offer participation in the Plan to officers of the Company who are not subject to an existing change of control agreement as of the date their participation in the Plan is to commence.  


The Board has also determined that an officer with an existing CIC Agreement (an “Identified Officer”) may become a participant in the Plan if he or she cancels the existing CIC Agreement.  In consideration for an Identified Officer cancelling his or her CIC Agreement, effective December 31, 2019, the Company will pay such Identified Officer seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) in a lump sum (subject to applicable tax and other withholdings) as soon as administratively possible after receipt by the Company of a signed Notice of Participation that will accompany the copy of the Plan that will be provided to you (“Notice of Participation”).  This offer will remain valid from December 1, 2019 to December 30, 2019.


You have been determined by the Board to be an Identified Officer to whom the Board desires to offer participation in the Plan. In order to assist you with your decision process, please find attached a copy of the Plan, to which the Notice of Participation is attached.  If you have any questions regarding your CIC Agreement, the Plan, the Notice of Participation or this letter please contact Bryan Cox at bryan.cox@avistacorp.com or at 509-495-8305.


If you decide to submit a Notice of Participation, you should return a signed copy of the Notice of Participation to Bryan Cox , MSC ___.  If you do not timely submit a Notice of Participation, your CIC Agreement will remain in effect, you will not receive the $75,000 payment and you will not be eligible to participate in the Plan.  


Sincerely,


Dennis Vermillion
President and Chief Executive Officer




Encl.
Ex-99.2 a)


                                                                       EXHIBIT 1

                  MANAGEMENT'S ASSERTION CONCERNING COMPLIANCE
                      WITH USAP MINIMUM SERVICING STANDARDS

March 7, 2002


As of and for the year ended December 31, 2001, GMAC Mortgage Corporation and
its subsidiaries (the "Company") have complied in all material respects with the
minimum servicing standards (the "Standards") set forth in the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR MORTGAGE BANKERS
("USAP").

As of and for this same period, the Company had in effect fidelity bond and
errors and omissions policy in the amounts of $400,000,000 and $50,000,000,
respectively.


/s/ David Applegate
------------------------------
David Applegate
Chief Executive Officer
GMAC Residential Holding Corp.


/s/ Ralph Hall
------------------------------
Ralph Hall
Chief Operating Officer
GMAC Residential Holding Corp.
##### 



ALLIANCE GAMING CORPORATION
FORM 10-Q

December 31, 2002

Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of
Alliance Gaming Corporation (the Company), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to his knowledge:



| |  |  | the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period
ended December 31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| |  |  | the information contained in such report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operation of the Company.                                     

Dated: February 12, 2003

/s/ Robert L. Miodunski
___________________
Robert L. Miodunski
Director, President and
Chief Executive Officer

/s/ Robert L. Saxton
________________
Robert L. Saxton
Sr. Vice President, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer (Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer)

36