alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Farrell D. FUGETT and Suzanne Guthrie, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 72-405, 72-406.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Dec. 13, 1972.

*29Claire K. Cates, of Nixon & Farnell, Clearwater, for appellant Guthrie.

Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, and Jeffrey L. Myers, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant Fugett.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and David Luther Woodward, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

LILES, Acting Chief Judge.

The State charged the appellants with robbery. During their trial it was discovered that the mother of appellant Guthrie had been adjudicated incompetent and she was not permitted to testify. In his closing argument, the prosecutor mentioned the fact that the mother had not testified and defense counsel moved for a mistrial.

> “MR. FARNELL [Attorney for Defendant Guthrie] : That is highly improper comment, and I believe we’d be entitled to a mistrial, Judge. I think that was flagrant. He knows full well why we couldn’t put her on.

> MR. MYERS [Attorney for Defendant Fugett]: There’s no way we can explain that away, now that it’s brought before the jury. We can’t explain to them the reason she could not testify was because she was incompetent. And I would join counsel in moving for a mistrial.

> THE COURT: I think it can be cured by an instruction to the jury.”

The judge then gave the following instruction to the jury to cure the improper comment.

> “THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this is improper argument on the part of the State’s Attorney. The testimony was that the father was inside the store, the mother was in the car. The mother was offered as a witness in this case. She had been declared incompetent by a Court. She is still incompetent. The Court would not allow her to testify, in view of her incompetence.”

It therefore appears that the judge, by his action, clearly denied the defense motion for mistrial.

As soon as the charge was given, the State moved for a mistrial. The judge then said that both parties had moved for mistrial, declared a mistrial, and discharged the jury. However, the judge had denied the defense motion for mistrial and by his language did not rescind that denial. Therefore, it cannot be said that the defense joined in the State’s motion thereby waiving double jeopardy. State ex rel. *30Manning v. Himes, 1943, 153 Fla. 711, 15 So.2d 613; State ex rel. Williams v. Grayson, Fla. 1956, 90 So.2d 710, 63 A.L.R.2d 777.

Thus, the trial court erred in denying appellants’ motion to dismiss on grounds of prior jeopardy when the case was reset for trial and in entering judgment and imposing sentence upon their plea of nolo con-tendere.

Reversed and remanded with directions to vacate sentences and discharge appellants.

HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62657-62658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30730]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 2642]


Office of Overseas School; 60-Day Notice of Proposed Information 
Collection; Approval of Funding to Support Educational Projects (JF-45)

SUMMARY: The Department of State is seeking Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) approval for the information collection described below. 
The purpose of this notice is to allow 60 days for public comment in 
the Federal Register preceding submission to OMB. This process is 
conducted in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    The following summarizes the information collection proposal 
submitted to OMB:
    Type of Request: Reinstatement, with change, of a previously 
approved collection for which approval has expired.
    Originating Office: Office of Overseas Schools (A/OS).
    Title of Information Collection: Approval of Funding to Support 
Educational Projects.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Form Number: JF-45.
    Respondents: The 190 Overseas American sponsored schools.

[[Page 62658]]

    Estimated Number of Respondents: 190.
    Average Hours Per Response: 25 minutes.
    Total Estimated Burden: 47.50 hours.
    Public comments are being solicited to permit the agency to--
    <bullet> Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is 
necessary for the proper performance of the agency functions.
    <bullet> Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the 
burden of the proposed collection.
    <bullet> Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected.
    <bullet> Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, 
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other 
forms of technology.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Comments regarding the collection listed in 
this notice or requests for copies of the proposed collection and 
supporting documents should be directed to Charles S. Cunningham, 
Directives Management Branch, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 
20520, (202) 647-0596.

    Dated: November 4, 1997.
Eliza McClenaghan,
Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-30730 Filed 11-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-M
|   | (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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: March 7, 2011 |  By:            Carolyn C. Shelton          |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                |  Carolyn C. Shelton                                                                                                                                  |
|                |  Chief Executive and                                                                                                                                 |
|                |  Chief Financial Officer                                                                                                                             |

----
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-15-0000901 24-FEB-2016 08:02 AM
ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA# 04-14-00004-CR

POSS CHILD

OFFENSE: PORNOGRAPHY

DEVIN ALEXANDER KANE V.

STYLE: the state of texas COUNTY: KERR

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: 216TM DISTRICT COURT

DATE: 02/11/15 Publish: YES TCCASE#: A1319

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

ELECTRONIC RECORD

DEVIN ALEXANDER KANE V.

STYLE: THE STATE OF TEXAS cca# ui'/V 3AV-/5*

APPBLL^tfT^5 Petition CCA Disposition:

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: /Tly, ZO. 2.o/£-

JUDGE:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR
Page 30.0 

Automotive Industries Pension Plan

Checklist Item #30

Does the application indicate whether the plan is a plan described in section 432(e)(9)(D)(vii) and, 

if so, how is that fact reflected in the proposed benefit suspension?

See section 6.06.

The Plan is not a plan described in section 432(e)(9)(D)(vii).
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1787 

To prevent unnecessary delay in firearms transfers from licensed firearms 

dealers to unlicensed persons. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 11, 2021 

Mr. CLYDE (for himself, Mr. HARRIS, Mr. HUDSON, Mr. DAVIDSON, Mr. 

GOOD of Virginia, Mr. BIGGS, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. PERRY, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. CARTER of Georgia, Mr. LOUDERMILK, Mr. HICE of Georgia, 

Mr. ALLEN, and Ms. TENNEY) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prevent unnecessary delay in firearms transfers from 

licensed firearms dealers to unlicensed persons. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ensuring Second 

5 Amendment Freedoms are Executed Timely Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1787 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON PROLONGED DELAY OF TRANS2 FER CAUSED BY THE GOVERNMENT. 

3 Section 922(t)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code 

4 is amended by striking clause (ii) and inserting the fol5 lowing: 

6 ‘‘(ii) 3 calendar days have elapsed since the li7 censee contacted the system, and the system has not 

8 notified the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by 

9 such other person would violate subsection (g) or (n) 

10 of this section; and’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.01






CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Colonial Commercial Corp. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William Pagano, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section 18 U.S.C. 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 Company.






By:
/s/ William PaganoName:
William PaganoChief Executive OfficerDate: August 5, 2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,724
<ALLOWANCES>                                       123
<INVENTORY>                                      1,595
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,264
<PP&E>                                           1,519
<DEPRECIATION>                                     738
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,340
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,278
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,093
<OTHER-SE>                                       (752)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,340
<SALES>                                            903
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,184
<CGS>                                              676
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,978
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   811
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  16
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    326
<INCOME-TAX>                                       125
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                201
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       201
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .04
        

</TABLE>
255 La. 276

#### GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY v. JEFFERSON DAVIS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, Inc.

No. 50328.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 6, 1970.

In re: Gulf States Utilities Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Jefferson Davis. 230 So.2d 273.

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.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

In The Supreme Court 

Demetrius Mack, Respondent, 

v. 

Leon Lott, in his Official Capacity as Sheriff of Richland 

County, Petitioner. 

Appellate Case No. 2014-002229 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS 

Appeal from Richland County 

DeAndrea G. Benjamin, Circuit Court Judge 

Opinion No. 27597 

Heard November 17, 2015 – Filed December 9, 2015 

DEPUBLISH THE OPINION OF THE COURT OF

APPEALS AND DISMISS CERTIORARI AS 

IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED 

Robert D. Garfield and Andrew F. Lindemann, both of 

Davidson & Lindemann, P.A., of Columbia, for 

Petitioner. 

Joshua Snow Kendrick and Christopher S. Leonard, both 

of Kendrick & Leonard, P.C., of Columbia, and Neal 

Michael Lourie, of Lourie Law Firm, L.L.C., of 

Columbia, for Respondent. 
PER CURIAM: We granted a writ of certiorari to review the Court of Appeals'

decision in Mack v. Lott, 410 S.C. 28, 762 S.E.2d 719 (Ct. App. 2014). We now 

dismiss the writ as improvidently granted since both parties and the trial court 

agree that the proper standard for determining probable cause is an objective 

standard; that is, whether the facts known to the arresting officer at the time of the 

arrest, viewed from the standpoint of an objectively reasonable police officer, 

amount to probable cause. Because the Court of Appeals' language on this issue is 

arguably unclear, for the benefit of the bench and bar, we direct the Court of 

Appeals to depublish its opinion. 

Accordingly, we 

DEPUBLISH THE OPINION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS AND 

DISMISS CERTIORARI AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED. 

PLEICONES, Acting Chief Justice, BEATTY, KITTREDGE, HEARN, JJ., 

and Acting Justice James E. Moore, concur.
July 9 , 2015

Mr. Brandon Taylor

820 Winter Wren Lane

Chesapeake, VA 23322

Dear Mr. T aylor :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We entered your July 1 st 2015 , exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA

- 20 15

-

2682 ), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to pr ocess your request any further, you must send the information described

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do No t Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267

- 9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Anal yst

, Airmen and

Airport Rules Division

Enclosure
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                         242,621
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,379,666
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 24,958,242
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            32,339,250
<PP&E>                                      34,923,948
<DEPRECIATION>                              22,891,750
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              45,336,322
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,204,766
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          743,191
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,686,053
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                45,336,322
<SALES>                                     35,280,611
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            35,280,611
<CGS>                                       30,214,276
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               31,575,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (116,392)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             464,300
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,012,908
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,012,908
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,012,908
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
59668 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 98–03]

36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Defense Security Assistance

Agency, DOD.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is

publishing the unclassified text of a

section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification.

This is published to fulfill the

requirements of section 155 of Pub. L.

104–164 dated, July 21, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

J. Hurd, DSAA/COMPT/RM, (703) 604–

6575.

The following is a copy of a letter to

the Speaker of the House of

Representatives, Transmittal 98–03,

with attached transmittal, policy

justification and sensitivity of

technology pages.

Dated: October 29, 1997.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices 59669
59670 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices 59671
59672 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 1997 / Notices

[FR Doc. 97–29065 Filed 11–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–C
Dear Mr. Sherman :

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA−2015

− 3198 )

. This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) to process your petition.

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to

proce ed without this manual and remove closed

- set filming from your proposed operation please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below.

Please submit the additional information (non

- proprietary) to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via email to 333exemptions@faa.gov

. If you want us to process your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 11/26/15 . I f we do not receive the
information

, we will close the dock et without notifying you further.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267

- 4549

.

Sincerely,
/s/
Michael J. Cameron Program Anaylst
EXHIBIT 32.2


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


     In connection with the Quarterly  Report of ICBS  International  Corp. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended  October 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Nathan Lapkin, Chief Financial Officer, and Director of the Company,  certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.  1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

     A.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     B.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.


                                          By: /s/ Nathan Lapkin
                                          -----------------------------------
                                          Nathan Lapkin
                                          Chief Financial Officer,
                                          & Director

                                          December 29, 2004

A signed  original  of this  written  statement  required  by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 ("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 required by Section 906,
has been  provided  to ICBS  International  Corp.  and will be  retained by ICBS
International  Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or
its staff upon request.
FAQ on Application Deadline for the Capital Assistance Program

In order to ensure compliance with the previously announced funding deadline of November 9, 2009,

qualifying institutions wishing to participate in the CAP are encouraged to submit their application to the

appropriate Federal banking agency by October 15, 2009. This will provide sufficient time for review and

will enable preliminarily approved applicants to meet the funding deadline.
#### DOBBINS AND RAMAGE, INC., Appellant, v. Anthony MOBARAK, a/k/a Tony Mobarak, and Jesse Eugene Graham, Appellee.

No. 72-1018.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 31, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.