alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

Filed 12/11/23 P. v. Smith CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

KEVIN DARNELL SMITH, J R

.,

Defendant and Appellant. E081859

(Super.Ct.No. FWV21000842)

APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Jo seph B. Widman

,

Judge. Dismissed.

Siri Shetty , under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and

Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.2

On the court ’ s own motion, the appeal filed in the superior court on

September 28

, 2023, from the trial court ’ s denial of defendant ’ s postjudgment motion for

re se ntenc ing under Penal Code section 1172.75 is DISMISSED because it does not affect

defendant ’ s substantial rights. (Pen. Code, § 1237, subd. (b).) The trial court lacked

jurisdiction to adjudicate defendant ’ s motion for resentencing

. (See People v. Burgess

( 202 2) 8 6 Cal.App. 5 th 375

, 380

- 382

, 384 [“ [S] ection 1172.75 simply does not

contemplate resentencing relief initiated by any individual defendant ’ s petition or

motion

. ”] .) Since the court lacked jurisdiction when it denied defendant’s re sentencing

motion , denial of the motion could not have affected his substantial rights. ( People v.

Chlad (1992) 6 Cal.App. 4th 1719, 1725

- 1726.) Accordingly, the order denying

defendant ’ s motion for re sentenc ing is not an appealable order, and the appeal must be

dismissed. ( Id . at p. 1725; s ee People v. Fuimaono (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 132, 135.)

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

FIELDS

J.

We concur:

MILLER

Acting P. J.

CODRINGTON

J

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
          EXTRACTED FROM LYNTON GROUP, INC.'S QUARTERLY
          REPORT FOR THE QUARTER ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998
          AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
          SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>           SEP-30-1999    
<PERIOD-START>              OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                        2,173,208                       
<SECURITIES>                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                 6,286,542
<ALLOWANCES>                     81,262
<INVENTORY>                   3,178,931  
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             15,926,253
<PP&E>                       33,623,413
<DEPRECIATION>                6,892,069
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               61,711,413
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>        17,367,854
<BONDS>                      34,704,378
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                      1,918,462
<OTHER-SE>                    2,561,673
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 61,711,413
<SALES>                      15,957,644
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             15,957,644
<CGS>                        12,742,012
<TOTAL-COSTS>                15,167,341
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 31,761
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              770,324
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (11,782)
<INCOME-TAX>                     25,303
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             (37,085)
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                    (37,085)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                     (0.00)
        

</TABLE>
#### Douglas Eugene NOGAR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-987.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 22, 1971.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 29, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Victor Giles NANCE v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 47165.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Feb. 19, 1973.

Rehearing Denied March 19, 1973.

Agnew, Agnew & Crawford, Jackson, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Wayne Snuggs, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before RODGERS, P. J., and PATTERSON, INZER, ROBERTSON and WALKER, JJ.

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 67405]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33543]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve; Notice of Public 
Workshops on Commercial Fishing

AGENCIES: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Public Workshops on Glacier Bay National Park 
Commercial Fishing Proposal

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

SUMMARY: The National Park Service will conduct public workshops on the 
Glacier Bay National Park commercial fishing proposal in Juneau, Alaska 
in January and February, 1998. The workshops will include discussion of 
data and management information regarding commercial fisheries 
occurring within the park, and ongoing and proposed research associated 
with commercial fishing activities. NPS published a Proposed Rule on 
April 16, 1997 (62 FR 18547) and is preparing an Environmental 
Assessment regarding commercial fishing within the park scheduled for 
release in March, 1998. NPS is sponsoring public workshops to improve 
public understanding of issues associated with commercial fishing in 
the park. Open houses and formal public hearings on the Proposed Rule 
and Environmental Assessment will be held in April, 1998 in Alaskan 
communities and Seattle, Washington before the May 15, 1998 public 
comment deadline. Notice of these hearings will be published in the 
Federal Register.

DATES: Public workshops will be held on January 8 and February 3, 1998 
from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

LOCATIONS: The January 8 public workshop will be held in the Hickel 
Room at Centennial Hall in Juneau, Alaska. The February 3 public 
workshop will be held in the Lumberjack Room at the Westmark Hotel, 
Juneau, Alaska.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. M. Brady, Superintendent, Glacier 
Bay National Park and Preserve, P.O. Box 140, Gustavus, Alaska 99826, 
Telephone: (907) 697-2230.

    Dated: December 12, 1997.
John Quinley,
Acting Regional Director, Alaska Region.
[FR Doc. 97-33543 Filed 12-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40520

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MARIO GUAJARDO-GARCIA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:15-CR-1163-1

Before DENNIS, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Mario GuajardoGarcia 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). Guajardo-Garcia 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 

 

* 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

December 20, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40520 Document: 00513804513 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2016
No. 16-40520

2

nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 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: 16-40520 Document: 00513804513 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2016
#### Charles M. TOLAR v. STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY.

No. 60827.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 1977.

In re: Department of Public Safety applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to *1030the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Jackson. 349 So.2d 922.

Denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 245 (Monday, December 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 66856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33266]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. AC98-6-000]


Florida Power Corporation; Notice of Filing

December 16, 1997.
    Take notice that on November 3, 1997, Florida Power Corporation, 
tendered for filing a letter seeking approval to begin accruing the 
increase amount of $1,213,656 on a wholesale basis, retroactive to 
January 1, 1995. FPC states that it is only seeking approval for an 
increase in the accrual amount, not in rates.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
or protests should be filed on or before December 26, 1997. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion 
to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-33266 Filed 12-19-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### In re ESTATE of Eugene Shelby HUGHES, Deceased.

No. 69-702.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Jan. 7, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### UNIVERSAL TRAINING SERVICE, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. J. WILSON CO., INC., etc., Respondent.

No. 43424.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 27, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 272 So.2d 877.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

McCAIN, J., dissents.
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 Annual Report of CRYO-CELL International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended November 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Mercedes Walton, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and I, Jill M. Taymans, Chief 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:

1. The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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/ Mercedes WaltonMercedes WaltonChief Executive OfficerFebruary 25, 2006/s/ Jill M. TaymansJill M. TaymansVice President, Finance, Chief Financial OfficerFebruary 25, 2006
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


     In connection with the accompanying Annual Report of Sooner Holdings,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2006 (the
"Report"),  I, R.C.  Cunningham  III,  Chief  Financial  Officer of the Company,
hereby certify that to my knowledge:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78o(d)); 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:  September 25, 2007

                                                       /s/ R.C. Cunningham III
                                                       -----------------------
                                                       R.C. Cunningham III Chief
                                                       Financial Officer


     The above  certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss.1350) and is not being filed as part of
the Form 10-KSB or as a separate disclosure document.




                                                                    Exhibit 32.1
                                                                Page 1 of 1 Page
U.S. 

### DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WORKSHOP ON STANDARDS FOR CLOTHES WASHERS U.S. Department ofEnergy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20585 (Rm. lE-245) December 14 - 15, 1998 

### Workshop Purpose: The Department is interested in receiving comments and data to improve its preliminary analysis. Inparticular, the Department is interested in seeking responses to the questions and/or concerns that were addressed in the Supplemental ANOPR. The Department also seeks comments on the methodologies and analyses to be conducted for theNOPR. 

### Workshop Outcomes: To receive comments onthe Supplemental ANOPRand receive comments on analyses to be conducted for the NOPR. 

### Proposed Agenda December 14 . 1:00 - 4:00 GRIM Training Session 

### December 15 9:00 - 9: 15 Introduction and Review Agenda 9: 15 - 9:30 Opening remarks and overview ofthe clothes washerrulemaking schedule Break (as appropriate) 9:30 - 11 :30 Comments and questions pertaining to the Supplemental ANOPR. Suggested topics include the following:

.,. Proposedproduct classes for products. .,. Information on national level historical, current, andprojections ofwater and sewerrates. .,. Information relating to the determination ofprice and operating cost elasticities. .,. Comments on the proposed DOE approach for determining shipments.\

11 :30 - 12:00 12:00 - 1:00

1:00 - 4:00 1:00 - 1:30 1:30 - 2:00 2:00 - 2:30 2:30 - 2:45 2:45 - 3:30 3:30 - 4:00 4:00 - 4:30 -continuedU.S. DEPARTMENT OFENERGY WORKSHOP ON STANDARDS FOR CLOTHES WASHERS

... Comments on the alternative standard scenarios: • The following are examples ofpossible alternative standards scenarios for consideration by the Department: • A moderate standard at an early effective date. Forexample, a level at a 25 percent improvement, effective three years after the publication ofthe Final Rule. • A stringent standard, at a later effective date. For example, a level at 45 percent improvement effective five years after thepublication ofthe Final Rule. • A two phase approach. For example, a level at 20 percent effective three years after the publication ofthe Final Rule (projected effective date

- October, 2002) and a level at 40 percent effective eight years after publication ofthe Final Rule.

... Other comments ( e.g., savings from detergent, additional information onthe cost ofunits at the 40% and 45%, retail markup, tub capacity, quality ofdata, accounting for maintenance, repair and warranty costs in life-cycle-costs, "life" ofappliance used in life-cycle-cost calculation andthe use ofthe AE099 forecast in the analysis) Results ofReverse Engineering: Phase II Lunch (On Your Own) Presentation ofNOPRanalyses

... Marginal energy and waterrates

... National Energy Savings - approaches to determine shipment and elasticity

... Consumer Survey - update Break

... ManufacturerImpactAnalysis "' Indirect Employment Environmental Assessment Utility ImpactAnalysis Summary Discussion and Adjournment
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 3RD DISTRICT COURT OF ANDERSON COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 18th

day of September, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

GERALD K. JOHNSON, Appellant

NO. 12-12-00312-CV; Trial Court No. 3-41481

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

FREDERICK M. EVANS AND CHRISTINE G. EVANS, Appellees

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the 

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court 

below be in all things affirmed, and that all costs of this appeal are hereby adjudged against the 

appellant, GERALD K. JOHNSON, for which execution may issue, and that this decision be 

certified to the court below for observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 10th day of July, 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our report dated March 2, 2009,
accompanying the consolidated financial statements included in the Annual Report of Cryo-Cell International, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended November 30, 2008. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the
Registration Statements of Cryo-Cell International, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-92991, effective December 17, 1999 and File No. 333-65418, effective July 19, 2001)



|                      
|----------------------
|/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
|                      
|Orlando, Florida      
|March 2, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32085]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C. 
20573.

Pathfinder Logistics, 10406 8th Avenue So, Seattle, WA 98168-1503, 
Arthur L. Griffin, Sole Proprietor
J-L International, 63-25B Bourton Street, #2B, Rego Park, NY 11374, 
James Lee, Sole Proprietor.
Apparel Transportation, Inc., 3101 Northwest 74th Avenue, Miami, FL 
33122, Officers: Leo Del Calvo, Jr., President; Antonio Yunta, Vice 
President.

    Dated: December 3, 1997.
Ronald D. Murphy,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-32085 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
<PAGE>
 
                               EXHIBIT 10.07(b)
<PAGE>
 
                                    FORM OF
                                   AMENDMENT
                                     TO THE
                               CUSTOMER AGREEMENT

     This Customer Agreement Amendment ("Amendment") is made as of this 1st day
of [MONTH, YEAR] by and between [THE FUND] (the "Fund") and Merrill Lynch
Futures Inc.

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into a Customer Agreement relating to
the purchase and sale of commodity futures and forward contracts and commodity
options (the "Customer Agreement");

     WHEREAS, the parties hereto have agreed to reduce the brokerage commissions
paid by the Fund to Merrill Lynch Futures Inc., the Fund's commodity broker,
pursuant to the Customer Agreement and wish to amend the Customer Agreement
accordingly;

     NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants
contained in the Customer Agreement and herein, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree to amend the Customer
Agreement as follows:

     1.  Brokerage Commissions. Beginning [DATE, YEAR] the brokerage commissions
         ---------------------                                                  
payable by the Fund to Merrill Lynch Futures Inc. will be reduced to ______ of
1% of month-end Net Assets, before reduction for such monthly brokerage
commissions and any New Profits Account allocation but after the crediting of
interest income received during the month (a ____% annual rate). Such brokerage
commissions shall not include any administrative fee paid directly to Merrill
Lynch Investment Partners Inc.

     2.  Amendment.  This Amendment may not be amended except by the written
         ---------                                                          
consent of each of the parties hereto.
 
     3.  Counterparts.  This Amendment may be executed in one or more
         ------------                                                
counterparts, each of which shall, however, together constitute one and the same
documents.

                                      -1-
<PAGE>
 
          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment has been executed by the parties
hereto as of the day and year first above written.

 
                              [THE FUND]

                              BY:   MERRILL LYNCH INVESTMENT
                                    PARTNERS INC., General Partner


                              BY:   ________________________________
                                    Name:
                                    Title:
 


                              MERRILL LYNCH FUTURES INC.
 

                              BY:   ________________________________
                                    Name:
                                    Title:

                                      -2-