alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-51335 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

OSCAR URBINA-PEREZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-00-CR-339-ALL

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

August 23, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Oscar Urbina-Perez appeals the 51-month term of imprisonment

imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in

the United States after removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Urbina-Perez argues that his sentence should not have exceeded

the two-year maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a). Urbina-Perez acknowledges that his argument is

foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but seeks to preserve the
No. 00-51335

-2-

issue for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). UrbinaPerez’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

 AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
**Exhibit 31 Certifications**I, Don J. McGrath certify that:     1.     I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of BancWest Corporation;     2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, resultsof operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;     4.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:        a)     Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;        b)     Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by 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 (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5.     The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):        a)     All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and        b)     Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.    /s/ Don J. McGrath
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                 5
<CIK>                                            0000863437
<NAME>                                   HECTOR COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                                              1
<CURRENCY>                                                U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                            12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                         DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                           1
<CASH>                                           12,455,399
<SECURITIES>                                        300,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                     4,003,184
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                         542,681
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 17,595,305
<PP&E>                                           65,794,563
<DEPRECIATION>                                   19,867,410
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  139,290,956
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             9,091,349
<BONDS>                                          97,793,195
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                         378,100
<COMMON>                                             20,794
<OTHER-SE>                                       14,048,228
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    139,290,956
<SALES>                                          28,866,365
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 28,866,365
<CGS>                                            19,112,957
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    19,112,957
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (3,429,927)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                6,797,354
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   6,385,981
<INCOME-TAX>                                      2,867,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               3,518,981
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      3,518,981
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                             1.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             0.93


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7654 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7654

    To require the Secretary of U.S. Department of Health and Human 
     Services to submit reports regarding coronavirus testing data.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 16, 2020

 Mr. Richmond introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To require the Secretary of U.S. Department of Health and Human 
     Services to submit reports regarding coronavirus testing data.

    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 ``COVID Testing Transparency Act of 
2020''.

SEC. 2. DATA SHARING.

    Not later than 14 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and 
daily thereafter, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall 
submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of 
Representatives and the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions, and make publicly available online, any data submitted to 
the Secretary pursuant to section 18115 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, 
and Economic Security Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
DATA DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES

COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT SHARE AND PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            THREE MONTHS ENDED               SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                 JUNE 30,                          JUNE 30,
                                                       ----------------------------      ---------------------------
                                                           1997             1996             1997            1996
<S>                                                      <C>              <C>              <C>             <C>      
PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE:
  Common stock outstanding                               9,687,083        9,173,771        9,686,891       9,173,771
  Common stock equivalents:
    Common stock warrants, if dilutive                     197,498          710,093          197,498         710,093
    Common stock options - incremental shares               67,386           76,534           70,590          48,467
                                                       -----------      -----------      -----------     -----------
  Weighted average shares outstanding                    9,951,967        9,960,398        9,954,979       9,932,331
                                                       ===========      ===========      ===========     ===========

  Net income, as adjusted:
     Before extraordinary item                         $     2,817      $     2,599      $     5,622     $     5,154
     Extraordinary item available for common stock            --                (54)            --               (54)  
                                                       -----------      -----------      -----------     -----------
         Net income available for common stock         $     2,817      $     2,545      $     5,622     $     5,100
                                                       ===========      ===========      ===========     ===========

  Primary earnings per share
     Before extraordinary item                         $      0.28      $      0.26      $      0.56     $      0.52
     Extraordinary item available for common stock            --              (0.01)            --             (0.01)
                                                       -----------      -----------      -----------     -----------
         Net income available for common stock         $      0.28      $      0.25      $      0.56     $      0.51
                                                       ===========      ===========      ===========     ===========
</TABLE>
Order filed February 12, 2015

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals ___________

No. 11-14-00307-CR

___________

BRITNEY NICOLE DOKEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 350th District Court

Taylor County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 10918-D

O R D E R

Appellant, Britney Nicole Dokey, has filed this appeal from a judgment 

revoking her community supervision for the offense of tampering with a 

governmental record. Upon reviewing the record in this case, we have concluded 

that the trial court’s certification of Appellant’s right of appeal is defective, and we 

direct the trial court to amend its certification. 

The certification contained in the clerk’s record reflects that the trial court 

certified that this is a plea bargain case and that Appellant has no right of appeal. 
2

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d). However, despite Appellant’s plea of true and 

the parties’ agreement with respect to punishment, this is not a plea bargain case. 

The Court of Criminal Appeals has explicitly held that Rule 25.2(a)(2) “refers only 

to plea bargains with regard to guilty pleas, not pleas of true on revocation 

motions.” Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). The 

Dears court further stated: “Regardless of whether a court feels that a defendant 

should be ‘bound’ by an agreement on a plea of true, the plain language of 

Rule 25.2(a)(2) does not contemplate that situation.” Id. Rule 25.2(a)(2) does not 

limit Appellant’s right to appeal from the judgment revoking her community 

supervision. See id. Thus, the trial court’s certification of Appellant’s right of

appeal was “defective.” See id. at 615; see also TEX. R. APP. P. 37.1. 

The trial court is directed to enter an amended certification reflecting that 

this is not a plea bargain case and that Appellant has a right to appeal, and the 

district clerk is directed to file in this court a supplemental clerk’s record 

containing the amended certification. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 34.5(c)(2), 37.1; 

see also Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614. The amended certification is due to be filed in 

this court on or before February 26, 2015. 

PER CURIAM

February 12, 2015

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and Bailey, J.
#### Willie James COX, Appellant, v. Coleman F. CARROLL, as Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Miami, a corporation sole and Mary Elizabeth Scanlon, Appellees.

No. 73-1066.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 28, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari denied.
UNITED STATES


SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K





CURRENT REPORT


PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE


SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934





(Date of report)July 30, 2013(Date of earliest event reported)July 30, 2013





ONEOK PARTNERS, L.P.


(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)





Delaware1-1220293-1120873(State or other jurisdiction(Commission(IRS Employerof incorporation)File Number)Identification No.)





100 West Fifth Street; Tulsa, OK


(Address of principal executive offices)





74103


(Zip code)





(918) 588-7000


(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)





Not Applicable


(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)





Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





[] Written communication pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





[] Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





[] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





[] Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))







---




The information disclosed in these Items 2.02 and 7.01, including Exhibit 99.1 hereto, is being furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), or otherwise subject to the liabilities under that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.





Item 2.02Results of Operations and Financial ConditionOn July 30, 2013, we announced our results of operations for the quarter ended June 30, 2013.  The news release is furnished as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated by reference herein.Item 7.01Regulation FD DisclosureOn July 30, 2013, we affirmed our 2013 earnings guidance and three-year financial forecasts.  The news release is furnished as Exhibit 99.1 and incorporated by reference herein.Item 9.01Financial Statements and Exhibits(d)ExhibitsExhibitNumberDescription99.1News release issued by ONEOK Partners, L.P. dated July 30, 2013.


2


---




SIGNATURE





Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.





ONEOK Partners, L.P.By:  ONEOK Partners GP, L.L.C.,General PartnerDate:July 30, 2013By:/s/ Derek S. ReinersDerek S. ReinersSenior Vice President,Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer





3


---




EXHIBIT INDEX








ExhibitNumberDescription99.1(d)News release issued by ONEOK Partners, L.P. dated July 30, 2013.














4
#### James SMITH, a/k/a Johnny Smith, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-873.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 8, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation byreference in Registration Statements Nos. 333-58684, 333-45638, 333-66065, 333-72288, 333-81430, 333-103639, 333-115076 and 333-132532 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-70624 on Form S-3 of our report dated April 17, 2008relating to the consolidated financial statements of Restoration Hardware, Inc. and subsidiaries (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of two new accounting standards), and ourreport dated April 17, 2008 relating to internal control over financial reporting (which report expresses an adverse opinion on internal control over financial reporting because of a material weakness), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Restoration Hardware, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended February 2, 2008. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

San Francisco, California 

April 17, 2008
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 8190]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4426]


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


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 835

[Docket Number EH-RM-96-835]


Occupational Radiation Protection

AGENCY: Office of Environment, Safety and Health, DOE.

Action: Proposed Rule; Extension of Public Comment Period.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking on December 23, 1996, (61 FR 67600) concerning amending its 
primary standards for occupational radiation protection. That notice 
provided the public with the opportunity to provide written comments on 
this issue with a written comment period to end on February 21, 1997. 
Today's notice extends this written comment period to March 31, 1997.

DATES: Written comments and data must be received by the Department on 
or before March 31, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and data (5 copies and, if possible, a 
computer disk) should be addressed to Dr. Joel Rabovsky, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Environment, Safety and Health, EH-52, 
EH-RM-96-835, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585. 
Telephone: 202 586-3012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Joel Rabovsky, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Office of Environment, Safety and Health, EH-52, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: 301 903-2135.
    For Information concerning the submission of comments, contact Ms. 
Andi Kasarsky on (202) 586-3012.

    Issued in Washington, DC on February 18, 1997.
Peter N. Brush,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and 
Health.
[FR Doc. 97-4426 Filed 2-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
No. 10291.

#### The Incorporated Village of Greenfield *v.*Brice et al., Admrs.

Decided April 14, 1908.

Error to Circuit Court of High*409land county.

*Mr. Wallace D. Yaple*and *Mr. Albert M. Mackerley,*for plaintiff in error.

*Mr. Wilson B. Brice*and *Mr. George L. Garrett,*for defendants in error.

Judgment affirmed.

Price, Summers and Davis, JJ., concur.
#### Juan DE JESUS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-294.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 30, 1969.

Juan De Jesus, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HEN-DRY and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to withdraw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having failed to respond thereto, on consideration thereof, upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous.

Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.