alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-40104

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JULIO CESAR MARTINEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:16-CR-1124-3

Before REAVLEY, PRADO, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Julio Cesar Martinez has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). 

Martinez has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the 

relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

 

* 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

November 22, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-40104 Document: 00514246966 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/22/2017
No. 17-40104

2

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 17-40104 Document: 00514246966 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/22/2017
**EXHIBIT31.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I,Patrick D Matthews, certify that:

 

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Primary BusinessSystems, Inc.;

 

2.Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

 
| Date:  November 13, 2003 | /s/  Patrick D Matthews  |   |
|-------------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|                          | Patrick  D Matthews      |
|                          | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
#### John J. FISHER, Appellant, v. NORMANDY FLYING CORPORATION, Appellee.

No. N-393.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 30, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Will WALLACE and Beatrice Wallace, his wife, jointly and severally, Appellants, v. Mattie Lou GILBERT, as Administratrix of the Estate of Gouvenor Lee Gilbert, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 70-594.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 23, 1971.

Goldberg, Rubinstein & Buckley, Fort Myers, for appellants.

Sanford M. Swerdlin, Clewiston, for ap-pellee.

MANN, Judge.

The complaint alleges that plaintiff’s decedent loaned several thousand dollars to defendants and was given legally inadequate evidence of the loan, when he had been led to believe that he had a valid note and mortgage.

Prior to trial, on the court’s own motion, the order appealed from was entered. It states that “the Court hereby rules that the Defendants, and all persons interested in this case, will not be allowed to testify to any of the dealings with the Deceased, with the exception of testifying whether or not they ever borrowed any money from the Deceased. They will not be allowed to testify that this money, if any, was borrowed so long ago that the Statute of Limitations of Florida applies; they will not be allowed to testify that the rate of interest was usurious; they will not be allowed *15to testify to any facts which would make applicable either the Doctrines of Laches or the Statute of Frauds, it affirmatively appearing from the pleadings, the style of the cause, and the facts before the Court, that Florida Statutes, Chapter 90.05, F.S. A., entitled ‘Witnesses; as affected by interest, more commonly referred to as the Deadman’s Statute,’ is applicable.”

The order was premature. The Deadman’s Statute can be waived. While anticipation of evidentiary problems which might arise at trial is admirable, counsel should have opportunity for argument and should in all events retain their rights to introduce admissible evidence. Whether evidence of the sort mentioned will be ultimately admissible depends on matters not shown of record. See Howland v. Strahan, Fla.App.3d 1969, 219 So.2d 472; cert. denied, Fla.1969, 225 So.2d 919; Security Trust Co. v. Calafonas, Fla.1953, 68 So.2d 562; Mayer v. Mayer, Fla.1951, 54 So.2d 105; Fla.Jur., Witnesses, § 124-128.

Reversed and remanded.

LILES, A. C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
#### Clarence McCALL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. L-443.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

July 22, 1969.

Louis O. Frost, Jr., Public Defender, and Gerald Sohn, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and James Robert Yon, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before us on a motion by the Public Defender’s Office to withdraw as counsel for the appellant. The only ground for said motion is that the appeal is without merit.

It has been decided by our Federal and State courts that a defendant charged with a crime is entitled to counsel at his trial, (no matter how guilty the defendant might be) and the Public Defender’s Office was created, inter alia, for such *449purpose. Also, an appellant is entitled to be represented by counsel on his appeal. This does not require counsel to violate any canon of ethics nor to proffer frivolous points of law or fact to the appellate court, but the office of such attorney extends to the hearing before the court for the purpose of assuring the appellant that all proper rules of procedure are adhered to, and the constitutional rights of the appellant preserved, as well as to answer questions that might be propounded by the court.

To permit withdrawal at this stage of the proceedings entails many and complicated factors such as delays, further request for counsel and often times additional records.

For this reason, this court denies the motion to withdraw as counsel for appellant.

JOHNSON, C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Opinion issued April 25 , 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 1 7
- 00 239
- CR

——————————— IN RE DEVIN PAUL COLE , Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator, Devin Paul Cole , has filed a complaint seeking to compel the respondent Harris County D istrict C lerk to forward his pro se pre

- trial habeas corpus application , seeking release on bond , to the trial court in the underlying p roceeding

. 1

1 The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Devin Paul Cole , Cau se No. 15 27907, 338th District Court, Harris County, Texas, t he Honorable Ramona Franklin presiding.2

We construe relator’s complaint as a petition for a writ of mandamus, but dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. This Court’s mandamus jurisdiction is limited to: (1) issu anc e of writ s of mandamus against a district court judge or county court judge in this Court’s district , and (2) issuance of writs of mandamus necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction. See T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 22.221(a)

– (b) (West 2004). Because relator’s petition is directed at the district clerk, not the trial judge, and does not indicate that issuance of a writ is necessary to enforce our appellate jurisdiction, we lack jurisdiction to issue the writ. See id. at § 22.221(a), (b)(1)

. Accordingly, w e d ismiss the petition f or writ of mandamus for want of jurisdiction

. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Massengale

. Do not publish. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2(b).
#### Dennis COX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2043.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

May 5, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                          <C>            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                12-MOS         12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            DEC-31-1998       DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                 DEC-31-1998    DEC-31-1997    
<CASH>                       $267,653     $119,985
<SECURITIES>                 $0            $0
<RECEIVABLES>                $13,242,678    $9,646,571
<ALLOWANCES>                 $10,000        $0
<INVENTORY>                  $0             $0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             $723,985       $638,127       
<PP&E>                       $5,171         $0
<DEPRECIATION>               $1,184         $0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               $13,538,690    $9,818,159     
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>        $10,914,874    $6,792,652     
<BONDS>                      $0             $0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>        $0             $0
<PREFERRED>                  $0             $0
<COMMON>                     $1,000,000     $1,000,000
<OTHER-SE>                   $44,599        $14,341        
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> $13,538,690    $9,818,158     
<SALES>                      $0             $0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             $1,004,731     $578,147       
<CGS>                        $0             $0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                $940,947       $569,971       
<OTHER-EXPENSES>             $0             $0
<LOSS-PROVISION>             $10,000        $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>           $665,246       $357,754       
<INCOME-PRETAX>              $53,784        $8,176         
<INCOME-TAX>                 $23,526        $5,854         
<INCOME-CONTINUING>          $0             $0
<DISCONTINUED>               $0             $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>              $0             $0
<CHANGES>                    $0             $0
<NET-INCOME>                 $30,258        $2,322         
<EPS-PRIMARY>                $0.30          $0.02          
<EPS-DILUTED>                $0.30          $0.02          
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

Each of the undersigned herebycertifies, for the purposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of theUnited States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, in his capacity as an officer of Poore Brothers, Inc. (the“Company”), that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report of the Company on Form10-K for the period ended December 27, 2003, fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that theinformation contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. This writtenstatement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as anexhibit to such Form 10-K. A signed original of this statement has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 
|                  |   |                                                                                                                                     |
|-----------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: March  23, 2004 | By:    | /s/    Eric  J. Kufel                                                                                                |
|                  |   |                                                                                                                                     |
|                  |   | Eric J.  Kufel  President and Chief Executive Officer                                                                                    |
|                  |   |                                                                                                                                     |
| Date: March  23, 2004 | By:    | /s/    Thomas  W. Freeze                                                                                             |
|                  |   |                                                                                                                                     |
|                  |   | Thomas W.  Freeze  Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer  Treasurer and Secretary (principal financial and  accounting officer) |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 182 (Friday, September 19, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 49189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24932]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97-201, RM-9127]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Crested Butte, CO

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document requests comments on a petition for rule making 
filed on behalf of Crested Butte Broadcasting Company, requesting the 
allotment of Channel 293A to Crested Butte, Colorado, as that 
community's first local commercial FM transmission service. Coordinates 
used for Channel 293A at Crested Butte are 38-52-06 and 106-59-06.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before November 3, 1997, and reply 
comments on or before November 18, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 
20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties 
should serve the petitioner's counsel, as follows: Nancy L. Wolf and 
Matthew H. Brenner, Esqs., Leventhal, Senter & Lerman, Suite 600, 2000 
K Street, NW., Washington DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 97-201, adopted September 
3, 1997, and released September 12, 1997. The full text of this 
Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during 
normal business hours in the FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M 
Street, NW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may 
also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20036, (202) 857-3800.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
See 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-24932 Filed 9-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
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

In connection with the
Annual Report of TC Global, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended April 3, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on July 5, 2011 (the Report), I, Catherine M. Campbell,
Chief Financial Officer (principal accounting officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                          
|----------------------------------------------------------
|/S/        CATHERINE M.
CAMPBELL                          
|Catherine M. Campbell
Chief Financial Officer July 5,
2011
Exhibit 10.23(a)
           Amendment to lease agreement for East Brunswick facility.

                                  HARARY GROUP
                                  275 ROUTE 18
                           EAST BRUNSWICK, N.J. 08816
                                 (908) 238-3311

                                                                    July 6, 1998

Fun Tyme of East Brunswick, Inc.
290 Wild Avenue
Staten Island, NY  10314

Attn:  Dan Catalfumo

Re:      Harary Group to Fun Tyme of East Brunswick, Inc.
         M[i]racle [sic] Mall, Route 18, East Brunswick

Dear Dan:

     As you know,  the total  square  footage of the space leased by Fun Tyme of
East  Brunswick  at the Miracle  Mall is 16,900,  rather than the 15,270 sq. ft.
indicated  in the Lease.  Accordingly,  the annual  Basic Rent  payable  for the
premises should be amended to provide as follows:

                                    ANNUAL RENT              MONTHLY INSTALLMENT
                                    -----------              -------------------
Lease Years 1 through 5             $202,800.00                  $16,900.00
Lease Years 6 through 10            $228,150.00                  $19,012.50
Lease Years 11 though 15            $256,711.00                  $21,392.50
Lease Years 16 through 20           $288,821.00                  $24,068.40

     The monthly  rental payable during the first five years will be $14,991.25,
after  giving Fun Tyme its  monthly  rent  credit of  $1,908.75.  To this amount
should be added an  estimated  monthly CAM charge of $2,637.,  and a monthly tax
change of $3,210.72, for a total monthly rental of $20,838.97.

     Based upon the these  numbers,  a balance of $5,568.97 is due from Fun Tyme
for the first month's rent, after giving Fun Tyme credit for the $15,270 payment
already made.

     In addition,  Fun Tyme's proportionate Share of Operating Expenses pursuant
to  Section  3 of the Lease  shall now be  18.32%,  based on a  shopping  center
consisting of 92,240 sq. ft. of space.

     After you review the above,  please  sign this letter and fax it back to me
to confirm you agreement to [the] Lease amendments.

                                                        Sincerely,
                                                        /s/ Joseph Harary
                                                        Joseph Harary
Fun Tyme of East Brunswick, Inc.
By:   /s/ Daniel Catalfumo                                  Dated:  July__, 1998
     ---------------------------
- 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 > Collective Bargaining Provisions: Union-Management Cooperation, Plant Efficiency, and Technological Change

              																	Weiss, Abraham, 1913-					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Collective Bargaining Provisions: Union-Management Cooperation, Plant Efficiency, and Technological Change : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 908-10*,												Washington: 								U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 										1949,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4398,			accessed on September 18, 2024.						    

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

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### Robert HORTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-959.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 6, 1971.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kinder, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Jay Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Hearn v. State, Fla.1951, 55 So.2d 559; Matera v. State, Fla.App.1969, 218 So.2d 180; and Tirko v. State, Fla.App.1962, 138 So.2d 388.