alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 6 , 2013

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 13

- 00371

- CR

DERON DREGSON CLARE , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1259832

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a guilty plea to assault with bodily injury to a family
member . In accordance with the terms of a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant on April 4, 2013 , to confinement for three years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a p ro se notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal.2

The trial court entered a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal in which the court certified that this is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has no right of appeal. See T ex. R. App. P. 25.2(a )(2). The trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See T ex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). The record supports
the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005).
Accordingly, we dismiss the app eal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Jamison and Donovan

. Do Not Publish

— T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b)
Exhibit 32.2
                                                                    ------------

                                 ALPHATRADE.COM
                              A Nevada corporation

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of AlphaTrade.com. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Katharine Johnston,
Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 Company.




         Dated: August 9, 2010                         /s/ Katharine Johnston
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Its: Principal Financial Officer



         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
         other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
         signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of
         this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be
         retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
         Commission or its staff upon request. The foregoing certifications are
         accompanying the Company's Form 10-Q solely pursuant to section 906 of
         the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section
         1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being
         filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.
|USDA Economics and Statistics System
|------------------------------------
|                                    

## Calendars of Release Dates for Reports and Datasets

---

|1998      | 1998   
|--------- | -------
|May       | June   
|September | October



---
- 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 > Public Social Security Programs in the United States, 1949-50 : Analysis of Laws, Federal-state Cooperation, Operating Experience, Further Needs

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Public Social Security Programs in the United States, 1949-50 : Analysis of Laws, Federal-state Cooperation, Operating Experience, Further Needs : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 982*,												Washington, D.C: 								U.S. G.P.O., 										1950,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4387,			accessed on September 24, 2024.						    

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

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
# L_2014284EN.01004501.xml

| 30.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 284/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 284/45

---

DECISION OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES

of 24 September 2014

appointing Judges to the Court of Justice

(2014/680/EU, Euratom)

(2014/680/EU, Euratom)

THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 19 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 253 and 255 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 106a(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The terms of office of 14 Judges and four Advocates-General at the Court of Justice are due to expire on 6 October 2015. New appointments should therefore be made for the period from 7 October 2015 to 6 October 2021. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The terms of office of 14 Judges and four Advocates-General at the Court of Justice are due to expire on 6 October 2015. New appointments should therefore be made for the period from 7 October 2015 to 6 October 2021.

| (2) | It has been proposed that the terms of office of Mr Koen LENAERTS and Ms Rosario SILVA DE LAPUERTA as Judges of the General Court should be renewed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

It has been proposed that the terms of office of Mr Koen LENAERTS and Ms Rosario SILVA DE LAPUERTA as Judges of the General Court should be renewed.

| (3) | The panel set up by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given an opinion on the suitability of Mr Koen LENAERTS and Ms Rosario SILVA DE LAPUERTA to perform the duties of Judges of the Court of Justice, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The panel set up by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union has given an opinion on the suitability of Mr Koen LENAERTS and Ms Rosario SILVA DE LAPUERTA to perform the duties of Judges of the Court of Justice,

HAVE ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following are hereby appointed Judges to the Court of Justice for the period from 7 October 2015 to 6 October 2021:

| — | Mr Koen LENAERTS, |
| --- | --- |

—

Mr Koen LENAERTS,

| — | Ms Rosario SILVA DE LAPUERTA. |
| --- | --- |

—

Ms Rosario SILVA DE LAPUERTA.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

Done at Brussels, 24 September 2014.

The President

S. SANNINO

---
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in
Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Paul V. Maier, Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer of Sequenom, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

1. The Companys Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.2 (the Quarterly Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act, and

2. The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Quarterly Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has set his hand hereto as of the 5th day of May,
2011.

/s/ PAUL V. MAIERPaul V. Maier Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer)
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1811 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1811

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the feasibility of 
   enlarging the Arthur V. Watkins Dam Weber Basin Project, Utah, to 
  provide additional water for the Weber Basin Project to fulfill the 
            purposes for which that project was authorized.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 3, 2005

Mr. Hatch (for himself and Mr. Bennett) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the feasibility of 
   enlarging the Arthur V. Watkins Dam Weber Basin Project, Utah, to 
  provide additional water for the Weber Basin Project to fulfill the 
            purposes for which that project was authorized.

    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 ``Arthur V. Watkins Dam Enlargement 
Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Arthur V. Watkins Dam is a feature of the Weber Basin 
        Project, which was authorized by law on August 29, 1949.
            (2) Increasing the height of Arthur V. Watkins Dam and 
        construction of pertinent facilities may provide additional 
        storage capacity for the development of additional water supply 
        for the Weber Basin Project for uses of municipal and 
        industrial water supply and flood control.

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF FEASIBILITY STUDY.

    The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of 
Reclamation, is authorized to conduct a feasibility study on raising 
the height of Arthur V. Watkins Dam for the development of additional 
storage to meet water supply needs within the Weber Basin Project area 
and the Wasatch Front. The feasibility study shall include such 
environmental evaluation as required under the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and a cost allocation as 
required under the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485 et 
seq.).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit  32.2
                                                                  -------------

                                 ALPHATRADE.COM
                              A Nevada corporation

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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of AlphaTrade.com. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Katharine Johnston, Principal Accounting Officer, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.ss. 1350,as adopted pursuant to ss.ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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 Company.




         Dated: November 12, 2007               /s/  Katharine Johnston
                                              ---------------------------------
                                              Its: Principal Accounting Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
The foregoing certifications are accompanying the Company's Form 10-QSB solely
pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not
being filed as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.














                               Exhibit 32.2 - 1
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 42793

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

T. C. LEE BLAKE ,

Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 654

Filed: October 6, 2015

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Bannock County. Hon. Robert C. Naftz , District Judge.

Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed

.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Reed P. Anderson , Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________ Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and HUSKEY, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM

T. C. Lee Blake pled guilty to possession of methadone , Idaho Code § 37

- 2732( c )(1)

. The district court withheld judgment and placed Blake on supe rvised probation for four years.
Subsequently, Blake violated the terms of her probation and t he district court imposed a unified
sentence of five years, with a minimum term of confinement of two years ; suspended the

sentence; and returned Blake to probat ion

. Blake admitted to violating probation a second time
and the district court revoked probation, ordered execution of the underlying sentence, and
retained jurisdiction. The district court relinquished jurisdiction and Blake filed an Idaho

Criminal Rule 35 motion, which the district court denied. Blake appeals.2

A motion for reduction of sentence under I.C.R. 35 is essentially a plea for leniency,

addressed to the sound discretion of the court. State v. Knighton , 143 Idaho 318, 319, 144 P.3d

23, 24 (2006); State v. Allbee , 115 Idaho 845, 846, 771 P.2d 66, 67 (Ct. App. 1989). In
presenting a Rule 35 motion, the defendant must show that the sentence is excessive in light of
new or additional information subsequent ly provided to the district court in support of the

motion. State v. Huffman , 144 Idaho 201, 203, 159 P.3d 838, 840 (2007). Upon review of the
record, including any new information submitted with Blake ’s Rule 35 motion, we conclude no

abuse of discreti on has been shown. Therefore, the district court’s order denying Blake ’s

Rule 35 motion is affirmed.
#### Roland Earl BLACKMON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 77-1885.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 15, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 21, 1977.

*532Robert W. Buonauro, P. A., Orlando, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard P. Zaretsky, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for respondent.

ON APPLICATION FOR PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS

DAUKSCH, Judge.

In accordance with the dictates of *Hallman v. State,*343 So.2d 912 (Fla.2d DCA 1977), Appellant has applied to this court for permission to apply to the trial court for a new trial based upon alleged newly discovered evidence. Since the filing of Appellant’s Petition our Supreme Court in *The Ohio Casualty Group v. Parrish et al.,*350 So.2d 466 (Fla.1977), has said permission need not be sought of the appellate court to file such a motion in a civil case. We see no reason the same rule should not apply in a criminal case, and hold that it does. Therefore, Appellant may file with the trial court such motions as he is advised in accordance with *The Ohio Casualty Group,*supra, without prior approval from us.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and LETTS, J., concur.
254 La. 803

#### Morris G. MAHER v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS.

No. 49963.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 23, 1969.

In re: Morris G. Maher applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 222 So.2d 608.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue ; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.
#### Albert F. GONSOULIN v. Roby V. SMITH, Jr.

No. 9558.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

June 12, 1978.

Rehearing Denied July 26, 1978.

John H. Hammel, Jr., John H. Hammel, III, and Richard A. Hammel, New Orleans, for plaintiff-appellee.

Gene E. Friedman, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

Before SAMUEL, REDMANN and SCHOTT, JJ.

SCHOTT, Judge.

On our own motion we questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal.

Appellant filed a petition to enjoin an executory process proceeding, praying for a temporary restraining order, a rule to show cause why a preliminary injunction should not be issued, and a permanent injunction against appellee. The trial court issued the rule and in response appellee filed an exception of no cause of action, praying that the debtor’s suit for injunction be dismissed. The judgment appealed from recites that rule for a preliminary writ of injunction and the exception of no right or cause of action came on for hearing but the decretal paragraph is as follows:

> “IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the exception of no right or cause of action herein be maintained, and the said rule for a preliminary injunction by defendant, Roby V. Smith, Jr., be and the same is hereby dismissed.”

This judgment was signed on March 23, the petition for suspensive appeal was filed on March 27, but the suspensive appeal bond was not filed until April 10.

LSA-C.C.P. Art. 3612 provides as follows:

> “An appeal from an order or judgment relating to a preliminary injunction must be taken and a bond furnished within fifteen days from the date of the order or judgment. The court in its discretion may stay further proceedings until the appeal has been decided.”

Thus, if the article applies to this case the last day available to appellant to furnish bond was April 7 with the result that we have no jurisdiction over the appeal.

Appellant contends that the case is governed by *Calhoun v. State,*152 So.2d 866 (La.App. 3rd Cir. 1963), but we distinguish that case for the reason that there in passing on the exception of no right of action filed by the defendant the court sustained the exception and dismissed the suit at plaintiff’s cost. The court noted that this was a final judgment which disposed, not *216only plaintiff’s demand for a preliminary injunction, but also his right to obtain a permanent injunction. In the instant case, by the plain wording of the judgment appealed from only the rule for the preliminary injunction was dismissed while plaintiff’s suit for a permanent injunction is still viable and pending in the trial court.

We have concluded that the provisions of Art. 3612 are applicable and that the appeal bond was filed too late. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

REDMANN, J., dissented with written reasons.

REDMANN, Judge,

dissenting.

If one has no *right*of action to enjoin preliminarily, he equally has none to enjoin permanently. Similarly, if one has no *cause*of action. The effect of the judgment is to dismiss plaintiff’s suit. We should apply the principle of *Calhoun.*
TEN STIX INC.
                             A Colorado corporation
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Ten Stix Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas E. Sawyer,
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chief Financial Officer, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss 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
     Company.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authentication, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed from within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Ten Stix Inc.,
and will be retained by Ten Stix Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Dated: September 15, 2004                   /s/ Thomas E. Sawyer
       ___________________                  _________________________________
                                            By:  Thomas E. Sawyer
                                            Its: Chief Executive Officer,
                                                 President and Chief Financial
                                                 Officer