alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed 

September 22, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-15-00760-CR, 14-15-00761-

CR, and 14-15-00762-CR

IN RE JEFFERY ALAN HARBERSON, Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS

122nd District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 15CR0015, 15CR0526, and 15CR0527

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On September 8, 2015, relator Jeffery Alan Harberson filed a pro se petition 

for writ of mandamus in this Court. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221 (West

2004); see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this Court to 

compel the Honorable John Ellisor, presiding judge of the 122nd District Court of 

Galveston County, to proceed to trial in Trial Court Cause Nos. 15CR0015, 

15CR0526, and 15CR0527.
2

The Galveston County records show that the trial court has appointed 

counsel to represent relator in these matters. A criminal defendant is not entitled to 

hybrid representation and a trial court’s decision not to rule on a pro se motion in 

this situation is not subject to review. Robinson v. State, 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. State, 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1995). 

Relator asserts in his petition that the trial court has not ruled on his pro se

motion for a speedy trial. This issue relates directly to criminal proceedings in 

which relator is represented by counsel. Therefore, relator has not shown that the 

trial court has a legal duty to rule on his pro se motion and the trial court’s failure 

to rule is not subject to review by this court. 

Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for a writ of mandamus.

 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Boyce, Busby, and Brown.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
No. 53369.

protests 123104-K, etc. (New York).

#### Park & Tilford Import Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 76 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 76

    Recognizing the social problem of child abuse and neglect, and 
         supporting efforts to enhance public awareness of it.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 1999

  Mr. Salmon submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Recognizing the social problem of child abuse and neglect, and 
         supporting efforts to enhance public awareness of it.

Whereas more than 3,000,000 American children are reported as suspected victims 
        of child abuse and neglect annually;
Whereas more than 500,000 American children are unable to live safely with their 
        families and are placed in foster homes and institutions;
Whereas it is estimated that more than 1,000 children, 78 percent under the age 
        of 5 and 38 percent under the age of 1, lose their lives as a direct 
        result of abuse and neglect every year in America;
Whereas this tragic social problem results in human and economic costs due to 
        its relationship to crime and delinquency, drug and alcohol abuse, 
        domestic violence, and welfare dependency; and
Whereas Childhelp USA has initiated a ``Day of Hope'' to be observed on the 
        first Wednesday in April, during Child Abuse Prevention Month, to focus 
        public awareness on this social ill: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That--
            (1) it is the sense of the Congress that--
                    (A) all Americans should keep these victimized 
                children in their thoughts and prayers;
                    (B) all Americans should seek to break this cycle 
                of abuse and neglect, and give our children hope for 
                the future; and
                    (C) the faith community, nonprofit organizations, 
                and volunteers across America should recommit 
                themselves and mobilize their resources to assist these 
                children; and
            (2) the Congress--
                    (A) supports the goals and ideas of the ``Day of 
                Hope''; and
                    (B) commends Childhelp USA for its efforts on 
                behalf of abused and neglected children everywhere.
                                 <all>
```
EX-32.1

---



|EXHIBIT
      32.1
|------------------



|CERTIFICATION OF 10-KSB
      REPORTOFCHINA ENERGY CORPORATIONFOR THE
      YEAR ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 2006
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. The undersigned are the Chief Executive
Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of China Energy Corporation. This
Certification is made pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
This Certification accompanies the 10-KSB Report of China Energy Corporation for
the year ended November 30, 2006.

2. We certify that such 10-KSB Report
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such 10-KSBReport
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of China Energy Corporation.

This Certification is executed as of March
14, 2007.



| | /s/ WenXiang
      Ding
      WenXiang DingPresident, Chief Executive Officer andChairman of the Board
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | /s/ WuSheng
      Liu WuSheng LiuSecretary and Chief Financial
  Officer
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
No. 52102.

protest 132354-K (New York).

#### Hudson Shipping Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

When this protest was called for trial there was no appearance on behalf of the plaintiff. An examination of the official papers failing to disclose any reason for disturbing the action of the collector, which was presumptively correct, the protest was overruled.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 86

JOINT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Korean

War and the service by members of the ArmedForces during such war, and for other purposes.
106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 86

JOINT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the 50th anniversary of the Korean War and

the service by members of the Armed Forces during

such war, and for other purposes.

Whereas on June 25, 1950, Communist North Korea invaded

South Korea with approximately 90,000 troops, thereby

initiating the Korean War;
2

•HJ 86 EH

Whereas on June 27, 1950, President Harry S Truman ordered military intervention in Korea;

Whereas approximately 5,720,000 members of the Armed

Forces served during the Korean War to defeat the

spread of communism in Korea and throughout the

world;

Whereas casualties of the United States during the Korean

War included 54,260 dead (of whom 33,665 were battle

deaths), 92,134 wounded, and 8,176 listed as missing in

action or prisoners of war; and

Whereas service by members of the Armed Forces in the Korean War should never be forgotten: Now, therefore, be

it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the Congress—

4 (1) recognizes the historic significance of the

5 50th anniversary of the Korean War;

6 (2) expresses the gratitude of the people of the

7 United States to the members of the Armed Forces

8 who served in the Korean War;

9 (3) honors the memory of service members who

10 paid the ultimate price for the cause of freedom, in11 cluding those who remain unaccounted for; and

12 (4) calls upon the President to issue a

13 proclamation—

14 (A) recognizing the 50th anniversary of the

15 Korean War and the sacrifices of the members
3

•HJ 86 EH

1 of the Armed Forces who served and fought in

2 Korea to defeat the spread of communism; and

3 (B) calling upon the people of the United

4 States to observe such anniversary with appro5 priate ceremonies and activities.

Passed the House of Representatives March 8,

2000.

Attest:

Clerk.
Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

131645 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, Plaintiff-Appellant, Justices

v SC: 131645 COA: 268740 Wayne CC: 05-000709-01 DAWAN ARTICE COLFER, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appe al the June 12, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

M ARKMAN , J., dissents and states as follows:

I respectfully dissent from this Court’s or der denying leave to appeal. Defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of armed robbery and two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. The tria l court sentenced defendant to five to 20 years for the armed robbery convictions, a c onsecutive two-year sent ence for one of the felony-firearm convictions, and a consecutiv e five-year sentence for the other felony

firearm conviction. However, the trial court subsequently granted defendant’s motion to amend the judgment of sentence and reduced the five-year sentence for felony-firearm to
a two-year sentence, to run consecutively to the arm ed robbery sentences but concurrently with the other two-year sentence for felony-fi rearm. The Court of Appeals denied the prosecutor’s appli cation for leave to appeal.

MCL 750.227b(1) states, “Upon a sec ond conviction under this section [for felony-firearm], the person shall be imprisoned for 5 years.” In People v Sawyer, 410 Mich 531, 536 (1981), this Co urt held that “the Legislatu re intended that a five-year term of imprisonment for a second [felony-firearm] conviction should onl y be imposed when the second offense is subsequent to the fi rst conviction.” The prosecutor argues that Sawyer should be overruled._______________________________________ __ 2

In this case, this was defendant’s sec ond conviction of felony -firearm and, thus, it
would seem that he should be imprisoned for five years according to the straightforward language of the statute. Contrary to the holding in Sawyer , MCL 750.227b(1) does not say that a five-year sentence is only appropr iate where the second conviction arises from
an offense committed after the imposition of the se ntence for the first conviction

. Therefore, I would grant the prosecutor’s application for leave to appeal to reconsider Sawyer.

C ORRIGAN , J., joins the statement of M ARKMAN , J.

s1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 27, 2006

Clerk
San Luis Obispo County APCD 210-1 11/5/91

RULE 210. PERIODIC INSPECTION, TESTING AND RENEWAL OF PERMITS TO

OPERATE (Adopted 8/2/76; Revised 9/24/79, 7/18/89, and 11 /5/91)

A. INSPECTION OF EQUIPMENT

1. For emission units other than gasoline dispensing f acilities, the District shall conduct an inspection prior to the renewal of a Permit to Oper ate to determine that the permitted equipment has not been altered, transferred either from one location to another or from one person to another, and that said equipment rema ins in compliance with all applicable Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations. Upon finding an alteration or transfer, or upon finding equipment b eing operated in violation of permit conditions, such action as is otherwise required by these Rules and Regulations shall be

taken.

2. The District shall inspect gasoline dispensing faci lities, which are subject to the provisions of Rule 424.D.4, twice annually to deter mine that the permitted equipment has not been altered, transferred either from one l ocation to another or from one person to another, and that said equipment remains in comp liance with all applicable Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations. Upon finding an alteration or transfer, or upon finding equipment being operated in violation of permit conditions, enforcement action, as required by these Rules and Regulations, shall be taken.

B. TESTING OF EQUIPMENT

1. The Air Pollution Control Officer may require of an applicant or permittee whatever sampling and source tests that are necessary to ver ify compliance of these rules when processing an application for a Permit to Operate, when renewing a Permit to Operate or

whenever the Air Pollution Control Officer finds th at an analysis is necessary. Testing shall be completed within 60 days of the request an d a report submitted to the District 30 days thereafter. All costs shall be paid by the applicant or permittee.

2. Any source test or analysis which is submitted to s ubstantiate an application submitted pursuant to Rule 202 (Permits) shall be conducted b y a method approved by the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO). The APCO shall h ave the right to observe and approve all such source tests and analysis. The AP CO retains the authority to conduct such source tests and analyses as are deemed necess ary to evaluate status of compliance and/or permit application materials.

C. RENEWAL OF PERMIT TO OPERATE

1. A Permit to Operate any article, machine, equipment or other contrivance shall be renewed periodically at a frequency set by the Dist rict. In no instance shall renewal occur more often than once a year.

2. Following renewal inspection and compliance determi nation by the District and payment by the Permit holder of the Permit Renewal Fee established in Rule 302, the

District shall issue to the Permit holder confirmat ion that his Permit to Operate is

renewed.
No. 51822.

#### Bellows & Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 968047-G, etc. (Denver, etc.).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-10506

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

EVERDA E. BARON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CR-233-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Everda E. Baron appeals the 36-month, above-guidelines sentence 

imposed after she pleaded guilty to possession of counterfeit financial 

obligations. She challenges the procedural reasonableness of her sentence, 

arguing that the district court erroneously calculated the guidelines range by 

applying a two-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1 (b)(11). That 

section authorizes a two-level enhancement if the defendant trafficked 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 31, 2014

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 13-10506 Document: 00512579224 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/31/2014
No. 13-10506

unauthorized or counterfeit “access devices.” § 2B1.1(b)(11). As Baron 

concedes, our review is for plain error. See United States v. Peltier, 505 F.3d 

389, 391-92 (5th Cir. 2007). 

The access devices at issue here are counterfeit American Express 

traveler’s checks. Although this court has determined that counterfeit or 

forged checks are not access devices under the definition set forth in 18 U.S.C. 

§ 1029(e), this court has not addressed whether counterfeit traveler’s checks 

are access devices under that section. See United States v. Hughey, 147 F.3d 

423, 433-36 (5th Cir. 1998). Thus, any error was not plain or obvious. See 

United States v. Ellis, 564 F.3d 370, 377-78 (5th Cir. 2009). 

In addition, the record demonstrates that the district court imposed a 

non-guidelines sentence based on the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. The district 

court’s reasons show that the court imposed a non-guidelines sentence due to 

the nature and circumstances of the offense as well as to promote respect for 

the law, to provide just punishment, and to deter future criminal conduct. 

Because the district court imposed a non-guidelines sentence based on the 

§ 3553(a) factors, any error in the calculation of the guidelines range did not 

affect the actual sentence; thus, Baron cannot demonstrate that but for error, 

she would have received a lesser sentence. See United States v. Dickson, 632 

F.3d 186, 191 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 13-10506 Document: 00512579224 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/31/2014
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 279

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 4, 2000

Received and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the 200th

birthday celebration of the Library of Congress.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),
2

HCON 279 RFS

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF EVENT TO CELEBRATE

2 THE 200TH BIRTHDAY OF THE LIBRARY OF

3 CONGRESS.

4 The Library of Congress (in this resolution referred

5 to as the ‘‘sponsor’’) shall be permitted to sponsor a public

6 event, the 200th birthday celebration of the Library of

7 Congress (in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘event’’),

8 on the Capitol Grounds on April 24, 2000, or on such

9 other date as the Speaker of the House of Representatives

10 and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the

11 Senate may jointly designate.

12 SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

13 (a) IN GENERAL.—The event shall be free of admis14 sion charge to the public and arranged not to interfere

15 with the needs of Congress, under conditions to be pre16 scribed by the Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol

17 Police Board.

18 (b) EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES.—The sponsor shall

19 assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities

20 incident to all activities associated with the event.

21 SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

22 (a) STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.—Subject to the

23 approval of the Architect of the Capitol, the sponsor may

24 erect upon the Capitol Grounds such stage, sound amplifi25 cation devices, and other related structures and equipment

26 as may be required for the event.
3

HCON 279 RFS

1 (b) ADDITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS.—The Architect of

2 the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board are authorized

3 to make any such additional arrangements as may be re4 quired to carry out the event, except that no arrangements

5 may be made to limit access to any public road on the

6 Capitol Grounds.

7 SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS.

8 The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforce9 ment of the restrictions contained in section 4 of the Act

10 of July 31, 1946 (40 U.S.C. 193d; 60 Stat. 718), con11 cerning sales, advertisements, displays, and solicitations

12 on the Capitol Grounds, as well as other restrictions appli13 cable to the Capitol Grounds, with respect to the event.

Passed the House of Representatives April 3, 2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
No. P68/119.

protests 62/3499, etc. (New York).

#### Getz Bros. Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of sink strainers in chief value of iron similar in all material respects to those the subject of Davies, *Turner & Company*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 488, Abstract 69651) and that the items of merchandise marked “B” consist of sink strainers in chief value of brass similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 69651, supra, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
IA

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 127

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2001, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 6, 2000

Mr. YOUNG of Florida introduced the following joint resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Appropriations

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

2001, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 106–275, is further amended by striking

4 the date specified in section 106(c) and inserting ‘‘Decem5 ber 8, 2000’’.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1



STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Form 10-Q of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, I, Theodore L. Chandler, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc.,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | (a) | such Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | the information contained in such Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of
operations of LandAmerica Financial Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries as of, and for, the periods presented in such Form 10Q.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|    |  |                                       |  |                     
|--- |  | ------------------------------------- |  | --------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Theodore L. Chandler, Jr.         |  | Date: August 2, 2005
|    |  | Theodore L. Chandler, Jr.             |  |                     
|    |  | President and Chief Executive Officer |  |                     



46