alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CASE STUDIES IN EMERGENCY ELECTION LITIGATION

Federal Judicial Center 10/25/2023 1

Communities of Interest 

in Congressional Districts 

Kansas v. Thornburgh (Julie A. Robinson, Deanell Reece 

Tacha, and J. Thomas Marten, D. Kan. 5:02-cv-4087) 

Two months before primary elections, a state’s attorney general filed 

a federal complaint challenging congressional district lines. Approximately one month later, a three-judge district court ruled that intervening plaintiffs had not shown an unconstitutional splitting of communities of interest. The attorney general was dismissed for lack of 

standing. 

Subject: District lines. Topics: Malapportionment; intervention; 

three-judge court. 

On June 5, 2002, Kansas’s attorney general filed a federal complaint in the District of Kansas against Kansas’s secretary of state challenging the congressional 

district boundaries drawn following the 2000 census.1 Judge Julie A. Robinson 

conducted a scheduling hearing on June 10, and a three-judge district court 

was appointed on June 11 to hear the case, adding Circuit Judge Deanell Reece 

Tacha and District of Kansas Judge J. Thomas Marten.2

The case was heard on July 3.3 The court had extended election deadlines 

to accommodate the court’s consideration of the case, including an extension 

until July 9 to file a congressional candidacy.4 The court granted motions to 

intervene by voters and American Indian tribes.5

Ruling on July 3, just over one month before an August 6 primary election, 

the court overruled the charge that the district boundaries improperly split up 

communities of interest.6 The attorney general, suing on behalf of the state, 

was dismissed as a party for lack of standing, but her office was permitted to 

represent some of the intervening plaintiffs.7

1. Docket Sheet, Kansas v. Thornburgh, No. 5:02-cv-4087 (D. Kan. June 5, 2002) (D.E. 1); 

Graham v. Thornburgh, 207 F. Supp. 2d 1280, 1282 (D. Kan. 2002); see Joshua Akers, Stovall 

Files Lawsuit Over Revised Congressional Districts, Wichita Eagle, June 6, 2002, at 3B. 

2. Docket Sheet, supra note 1 (D.E. 5, 6); Graham, 207 F. Supp. 2d at 1282. 

Judge Tacha retired on June 1, 2011, and Judge Marten retired on May 1, 2021. Federal 

Judicial Center Biographical Directory of Article III Federal Judges, www.fjc.gov/history/ 

judges. 

3. Docket Sheet, supra note 1 (D.E. 40, 43); Graham, 207 F. Supp. 2d at 1282–83; see Steve 

Painter, House Districts Debated in Court, Wichita Eagle, July 3, 2002, at 1B. 

4. Docket Sheet, supra note 1 (D.E. 22); Graham, 207 F. Supp. 2d at 1282–83; see Candidates Now Have Longer to File, Wichita Eagle, June 16, 2002, at 6B; Josh Funk, 10 Local House 

Races Will Have Primary Contests, Wichita Eagle, June 25, 2002, at 1B. 

5. Docket Sheet, supra note 1 (D.E. 16); Graham, 207 F. Supp. 2d at 1282. 

6. Graham, 207 F. Supp. 2d at 1285–97; see Judges: House Districts OK, Wichita Eagle, July 

4, 2002, at 1B. 

7. Graham, 207 F. Supp. 2d at 1283–85.
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Create a User Identity in SailPoint IIQ

To create a user identity, complete the following steps:

1. At the top left of the SailPoint IIQ application, select the Hamburger Menu to display the 

available menu options. 

2. Select the Manage Identity option, then select Create Identity as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Creating Identity in SailPoint IIQ

3. SailPoint IIQ will route to the Create Identity screen as shown in Figure 2. 

• There will be two fields available to fill out, Identity Name and Email. 

• The Identity Name will be prepopulated as it is a unique identifier required by 

SailPoint IIQ. 

Application Tip
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

2

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

4. Enter an email address for the identity you want to create and select Submit at the bottom 

of the page.

Figure 2: Create Identity Screen 

SailPoint IIQ will notify you if an identity with the email you provided already exists.

5. Once submitted, SailPoint IIQ will display the homepage with a success message as shown 

in Figure 3. 

Application Tip
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

3

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

Figure 3: Create Identity Request Submitted 

• Due to system design, it may take up to a minute for the identity to be processed in 

SailPoint IIQ.

• Two notification emails will be sent out once an identity is created, one to the new 

identity holder and one to the person who created the identity. 

Application Tip
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 1 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 2 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 3 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 4 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 5 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 6 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 7 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 8 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 9 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 10 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 11 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 12 of 13
Case 0:04-cr-00029-JRT-FLN Document 27 Filed 03/08/05 Page 13 of 13
No. 51983.

#### Gotham Watch Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 131869-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The protests were dismissed.
No. 52894.

#### S. & A. Diamond et al. *v.*United States,

protests 107852-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of platinum fox fur skins, undressed, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. C. *Brager-Larsen*(36 C. C. P. A. 1, C. A. D. 388). The claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was therefore sustained.
**Part 1 	 	Fiscal Year 2019 Reporting**

**SUPPLEMENT 	 	Section III**

**U.S. Standard General Ledger**

**Account Transaction Listing**

**TRANSACTION**

**CODETRANSACTION DESCRIPTION**

**Part 1 	 	Fiscal Year 2019 Reporting**

**SUPPLEMENT 	 	Section III**

**U.S. Standard General Ledger**

**Account Transaction Listing**

**TRANSACTION**

**CODETRANSACTION DESCRIPTION**

**Part 1 	 	Fiscal Year 2019 Reporting**

**SUPPLEMENT 	 	Section III**

**U.S. Standard General Ledger**

**Account Transaction Listing**

**TRANSACTION**

**CODETRANSACTION DESCRIPTION**

**Bulletin No. 2019-10 	III AL -****1 	June 2019**

**Bulletin No. 2019-10 	III AL -****1 	June 2019**

**Bulletin No. 2019-10 	III AL -****1 	June 2019**
**CATALOG OF SMALL BUSINESS RESEARCH1995 edition

Table of Contents

**Foreword
How to Use the Catalog
List of Abbreviations
Acquisitions and Mergers
Business Formation, Growth, and Decline
Competition 
Data Base Research 
Disability Issues 
Employment and Training 
Energy and Transportation
Environmental Regulation
Exporting
Finance, Interest, and Credit
Franchising
Government Procurement
Government Regulation
Home-Based Businesses 
Minority-Owned Businesses
Productivity 
Regional Reports
Science, Technology, and Innovation 
State and Local Economic Development  
Taxes 
Veterans' Studies  
Wages, Benefits, and Payroll Costs  
Women-Owned Businesses 
Office of Advocacy Publications  
Other SBA Publications  
How to Order from NTIS  

*Last Modified:  7-28-97**

**
Exhibit 32.1


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Merrill Lynch Preferred
Capital Trust V (the "Trust") and Merrill Lynch Preferred Funding V, L.P.
for the period ended September 26, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marlene Debel,
Regular Trustee of the Trust, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Trust.





                              MERRILL LYNCH PREFERRED CAPITAL TRUST V


                              By:  /s/ Marlene Debel
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                              Name:    Marlene Debel*
                              Title:   Regular Trustee









Dated: November 7, 2008
---------------------

* Marlene Debel functions as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer
  and Chief  Financial  Officer of the Trust for  purposes  of Section  906
  of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
**Part 1, Section VI: USSGL Crosswalks to Reclassified**

**Statements**

This section includes crosswalks for use in Fiscal Year 2019 GTAS Reporting. These crosswalks map

USSGL accounts to external reports in accordance with TFM Volume I, Part 2, Chapter 4700, Federal Entity Reporting Requirements for the *Financial Report of the United States Government.*Each report crosswalk lists the proper USSGL accounts and applicable attributes for each line and/or column on the reports. Attributes identify information subsidiary to the basic 6-digit USSGL accounts. This subsidiary information is necessary to meet external reporting requirements. See Section IV for additional information on attributes.

The following are crosswalks from the USSGL Chart of Accounts to standard external reports required by Fiscal Service:

**Section VI	Page Number**

USSGL Crosswalk Reclassified Balance Sheet (RBS)	VI RBS - 1

USSGL Crosswalk Reclassified Statement of Net Cost (RSNC)	VI RSNC - 1

USSGL Crosswalk Reclassified Statement of Operations and Changes VI RSOCNP - 1 in Net Position (RSOCNP)	          Page 1 of 1

# image1.jpg
Part 2 Fiscal Year 2025 Reporting

SUPPLEMENT Section IV

U.S. Standard General Ledger - Account Attribute Definition Report

Attribute Name Short

Name Attribute Definition Domain SystemChars Reference SuppliedBy

Bulletin No. 2024-01 IV ADR - 1 IRC Handout

Credit Cohort Year Cohort Yr Fiscal year when direct loans are obligated or guarantees 

committed by a program, even if disbursements occur in 

subsequent fiscal years.

1001 - OPIC Working Capital,

1992-20252026

4/N OMB Circ. 

No. A-11

Bulk File
Part 2 Fiscal Year 2025 Reporting

SUPPLEMENT Section IV

U.S. Standard General Ledger - Account Attribute Definition Report

Attribute Name Short

Name Attribute Definition Domain SystemChars Reference SuppliedBy

Bulletin No. 2024-01 IV ADR - 2 IRC Handout
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SKIPPY CHARLES RUTKOWSKI,

Petitioner, 2:04-cv-0888-GEB-PAN-P

vs.

MULE CREEK STATE PRISON,

Respondent. ORDER

 /

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has

filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local

General Order No. 262.

On November 17, 2005, the magistrate judge filed

findings and recommendations herein which were served on all

parties and which contained notice to all parties that any

objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed 

Case 2:04-cv-00888-GEB-PAN Document 12 Filed 12/21/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

within 20 days. Neither party has filed objections to the

findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings

and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the

magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed November 17,

2005, are adopted in full; and 

2. This action be dismissed without prejudice for

plaintiff’s failure to inform the court of his new address. 

L.R. 83-183(b).

Dated: December 20, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00888-GEB-PAN Document 12 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RICHARD E. WILMSHURST, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0988 DFL KJM PS

vs.

BILL LOCKYER, Attorney General,

Defendant. ORDER

 /

Defendants have noticed a motion to dismiss for hearing on May 25, 2005 before

the undersigned. This action is presently the subject of an interlocutory appeal of the district

court’s January 4, 2005 order denying plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order. 

Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint and defendants have now responded with a motion to

dismiss. It appears that during pendency of the interlocutory appeal, this court lacks jurisdiction

to resolve the motion to dismiss. See generally Mayweathers v. Newland, 258 F.3d 930, 935 (9th

Cir. 2001). 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties are advised the court

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-00988-DFL -KJM Document 62 Filed 04/28/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

will inquire into the question of jurisdiction at the hearing on the motion to dismiss.

DATED: April 26, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

006

wilmshurst.jur

Case 2:04-cv-00988-DFL -KJM Document 62 Filed 04/28/05 Page 2 of 2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21
- 013 3 STATE OF MONTANA ,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CHARLES ANDREW DRURY,

Defendant and Appellant .

**GRANT** Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until May 26 , 2021, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court April 28 2021

04/28/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0133
# C_2017144EN.01004001.xml

| 8.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 144/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 March 2017 — Vignerons de la Méditerranée v EUIPO — Bodegas Grupo Yllera (LE VAL FRANCE)

(Case T-216/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark LE VAL FRANCE - Earlier EU word mark VIÑA DEL VAL - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2017/C 144/53)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Vignerons de la Méditerranée (Narbonne, France) (represented by: M. Karsenty-Ricard and M. Merli, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Bodegas Grupo Yllera SL (Rueda, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 March 2016 (Case R 427/2015-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Bodegas Grupo Yllera and Vignerons de la Méditerranée.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Vignerons de la Méditerranée to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Vignerons de la Méditerranée to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 243, 4.7.2016.

1

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Julian GARCIA-LONZO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-50208.

D.C. No. CR-99-97-AHS.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 11, 2001.1

Decided June 25, 2001.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, SILVERMAN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

1

. The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4.

MEMORANDUM2

Julian Garcia-Lonzo appeals the judgment of conviction and 77-month sentence following his guilty plea to a single count of being a deported alien found in the United States in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Garcia-Lonzo contends that in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), section 1326(b)(2) is unconstitutional because it allows a court to increase the maximum penalty at sentencing, based on whether a defendant was deported subsequent to a prior conviction for an aggravated felony, without submitting this fact to a jury for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This contention is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998) (upholding enhancement where the defendant admitted to underlying felony convictions and subsequent deportation) and by *United States v. Pacheco-Zepeda,*234 F.3d 411 (9th Cir.2000), *as amended*(Feb. 8, 2001), *cert. denied,*— U.S. —, 121 S.Ct. 1503, 149 L.Ed.2d 388 (2001).

*578AFFIRMED.3

2

. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the *578courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

3

. The motion of the United States to dismiss the appeal is denied.
No. 67845.

#### William A. Rogers, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 62/17298-13406 (Chicago).

*340Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

Since the protest was filed more than 60 days after liquidation, it was dismissed as untimely, by virtue of section 514, Tariff Act of 1930.
This page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Air Quality Board Rules and RegulationsThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Ada County OrdinanceThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Boise City CodeThis page left blank intentionally.Meridian City CodeThis page left blank intentionally.Eagle City CodeThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Appendix F. Rules Estab lishing State Authority

IDAPA 58.01.01 Rules for the Contro l of Air Pollution in Idaho

http://adm.idaho.gov/adminr ules/rules/idapa58/0101.pdf

IDAPA 58.01.23 Rules of Administrative Procedure before the Board of

Environmental Quality

http://adm.idaho.gov/adminr ules/rules/idapa58/0123.pdf

Idaho Administrative Code

Title 67 State Government and State Affairs

Chapter 52 Idaho Administrative Procedures Act

http://www.legislature.ida ho.gov/idstat/Title67/T67CH52.htmThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Legal Notification of Public Comment Period and Public HearingThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Public Comments ReceivedThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Public Hearing DocumentsThis page left blank intentionally.This page left blank intentionally.Response to Public CommentsThis page left blank intentionally.
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICER

OF

LENNAR PARTNERS, INC.

Pooling and Servicing Agreement

dated as of December 1, 2000, (the "Agreement"), by and among

Salomon Brothers Mortgage Securities VII, Inc., as Depositor, Midland Loan

Services, Inc., as Master Servicer, Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, N.A., as Trustee,

LaSalle Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator and as Tax Administrator

and Lennar Partners, Inc., as Special Servicer

(SBMS 2000-C3)

 

The undersigned, Ronald E. Schrager, as Vice President of LENNAR PARTNERS, INC., a Florida Corporation (the "Company"), in accordance with Section 3.13 of the Agreement, does hereby certify on behalf of the Company that (i) a review of the activities of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2001 and of the Company's performance under the Agreement has been made under my supervision; (ii) to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout such period ended December 31, 2001; and (iii) the Company has received no notice regarding the qualification, or status, of any REMIC Pool as a REMIC or the status of either Grantor Trust Pool as a Grantor Trust or otherwise asserting a tax on the income or assets of, any portion of the Trust Fund from the IRS or any other governmental agency or body.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed and delivered this Certificate as of the 1 st day of March, 2002.

 

 

 

 

Ronald E. Schrader

Ronald E. Schrader Vice President

 Lennar Partners. lnc.

OC SBMS VII 2000-C3
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1223 

KA 13-01583 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FRANCIS S. SMITH, ALSO KNOWN AS FRANCIS SMITH, 

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

(APPEAL NO. 1.) 

 

THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., BUFFALO (ALAN WILLIAMS OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

LAWRENCE FRIEDMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, BATAVIA (WILLIAM G. ZICKL OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C.

Noonan, J.), rendered May 2, 2013. The judgment convicted defendant,

upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: In appeal No. 1 and appeal No. 2, defendant appeals

from separate judgments convicting him upon his pleas of guilty of

attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25

[2]). Both pleas were entered during one plea proceeding, during

which defendant waived his right to appeal. We reject defendant’s

challenge in each appeal to the validity of the waiver of the right to

appeal. “The written waiver of the right to appeal, together with

defendant’s responses during the plea proceeding, establish that the

waiver was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently entered” (People

v Griner, 50 AD3d 1557, 1558, lv denied 11 NY3d 737; see People v

Ramos, 7 NY3d 737, 738). The valid waiver of the right to appeal

encompasses defendant’s challenge in each appeal to the severity of

the sentence, including the period of postrelease supervision (see

People v Raynor, 107 AD3d 1567, 1568, lv denied 22 NY3d 1090; People v

McMullen, 94 AD3d 1434, 1434-1435, lv denied 19 NY3d 964; People v

Laskowski, 46 AD3d 1383, 1384). Although defendant’s challenge in

each appeal to the validity of the orders of protection issued by

County Court survives his waiver of the right to appeal (see People v

Smith, 83 AD3d 1213, 1214; People v Victor, 20 AD3d 927, 928, lv

denied 5 NY3d 833, reconsideration denied 5 NY3d 885), he failed to

preserve those challenges for our review inasmuch as he did not object

to the orders of protection either during the plea proceeding or at

sentencing (see People v Russell, 120 AD3d 1594, 1594-1595; Smith, 83
-2- 1223 

KA 13-01583 

AD3d at 1213-1214). Indeed, defense counsel specifically advised the

court that defendant had no objection to entry of the orders at issue. 

We therefore decline to exercise our power to review defendant’s

challenges as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see

CPL 470.15 [3] [c]). 

Entered: November 21, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court