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

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-82,967-01

EX PARTE HARRY GOFFNEY, JR., Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1447414-A IN THE 230TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of

methlenedioxy methamphetamine (MDMA) in an amount of less than one gram, and was sentenced

to nine months in state jail. He did not appeal his conviction. 

Applicant contends that his plea was involuntary and that his conviction violates due process

because the evidence in his case was tested and found not to contain any MDMA, even though the

lab test shows that the evidence contained a different controlled substance, methamphetamine. 
The parties have entered agreed findings of fact and conclusions of law, and the trial court

has determined that Applicant’s decision to plead guilty in this case was not a voluntary and

intelligent choice. Applicant is entitled to relief. Ex parte Mable, 443 S.W.3d 129 (Tex. Crim. App.

2014).

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 144741401010 in the 230th District Court of

Harris County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Harris County

to answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary bench

warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to theTexas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: January 27, 2016

Do not publish
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
ICC Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-37036,
33-37037, 33-85634, 33-85636, 33-89122 and 33-89124) of our report, which
includes an explanatory paragraph which refers to conditions that raise
substantial doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern,
dated March 20, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of
ICC Technologies, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and for the years ended
December 31, 1997, 1996, and 1995, which report is included in the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997. We also consent
to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (set forth
above) of the Company of our report, dated March 20, 1998, on our audits of the
financial statements of Engelhard/ICC as of December 31, 1997 and 1996 and for
the years ended Decmeber 31, 1997, 1996 and 1995, which report is also included
in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1997.




COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 31, 1998
EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                        REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE
                SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AND
                 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002.

         Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of International Wire Group,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

         (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
ended June 30, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and

         (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



Dated:  September 14, 2005                        /s/ GLENN J. HOLLER
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Name:  Glenn J. Holler
                                                 Title: Chief Financial Officer
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Shawn Smith, Appellant

No. 06-14-00156-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 102nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 13F0106-

102). Opinion delivered by Justice Carter,*

Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Moseley, 

participating. *Justice Carter, Sitting by 

Assignment.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Shawn Smith, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs 

of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 16, 2015

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000947969
<NAME> MANGOSOFT, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> $

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                              98
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   119
<PP&E>                                           2,033
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,853
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     306
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,497
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           32,671
<PREFERRED>                                         30
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                    (39,893)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       306
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,814
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  86
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,897)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,897)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (19.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (19.01)




</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Fitzgeralds Gaming
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarter ended March 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Michael E. McPherson, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and

         2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
              material respects, the financial condition of the Company as of
              the dates indicated and result of operations of the Company for
              the periods indicated.

                                         /s/ Michael E. McPherson
                                         Michael E. McPherson
                                         Executive Vice President and Chief
                                         Financial Officer
                                         May 12, 2003
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                               ACCELGRAPHICS, INC.
         STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
                  (amounts in thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   Three Months Ended          Six Months Ended
                                                         June 30,                  June 30,
                                                    1997         1996          1997         1996
                                                  -------      -------       -------      -------
<S>                                                 <C>          <C>           <C>          <C>  
Weighted average common shares outstanding
  for period                                        6,981        1,108         4,103        1,089

Dilutive employee stock options and warrants          793         --             564         --
                                                  -------      -------       -------      -------
                                                    7,774        1,108         4,667        1,089

Common Equivalent Shares pursuant to Staff
  Accounting Bulletin No. 83 (1)                    1,018        5,137         3,078        5,137
                                                  -------      -------       -------      -------


Shares used in per share calculations               8,792        6,245         7,745        6,226
                                                  =======      =======       =======      =======

Net income (loss)                                 $   525      $  (595)      $ 1,359      $(1,155)
                                                  =======      =======       =======      =======


Net income (loss) per share                       $  0.06      $ (0.10)      $  0.18      $ (0.19)
                                                  =======      =======       =======      =======
</TABLE>

(1) - Includes all Preferred Stock on an as-if converted basis and stock
      options and warrants granted after February 7, 1996 (using the treasury
      stock method).




                                    Page 24
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 14

- 00220

- CR

SHAHID KARRIEM ANSARI, III, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 354th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 27,739

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.2 

### O R D E R

Shahid Karriem Ansari, III

, appeals from his conviction of burglary of a habitation and the

resulting sentence of seven years’ imprisonment . The clerk’s record in this matter was filed March

26, 2015, and the reporter’s record was filed May 21, 2015, making Ansari’ s brief originally due

June 22, 2015. This deadline was extended once by this Court on the motion of Ansari’s appellate

counsel, Jason A. Duff, resulting in the most recent due date of July 22, 2015. Duff has now filed

a second motion seeking an additional extension of the briefing deadline.

We have reviewed the second motion to extend time as well as the appellate record, and

we find no compelling information to convince us that this brief requires more time to prepare.

The motion to extend time to file Ansari’s appellate brief is overruled.

We order Duff to file Ansari’s appel lat e brief with this Court on or before August 21, 201 5

.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: July 28, 2015
#### ISAAC WAPLES, surviving obligee of THOMAS C. WAPLES and ISAAC WAPLES use of WILLIAM D. WAPLES *vs.*ISAAC CLOWS and THOMAS DRAPER, adm’rs. of ALETTA CLARK, deceased.

An attorney is not competent to contradict his own entry of satisfaction on a judgment; and deny that the money was paid.

JunaMENT opened.

Isaac Clows became the guardian of John M. Wolfe and Eliza R. Wolfe and gave bond with Thomas C. Waples and John Waples (the plffs.) as his sureties. Isaac Clows with Aletta Clark gave to the said Thomas C. Waples and Isaac Waples sureties as afsd. a bond with warrant of attorney to confess judgment in the sum of $8,000; to indemnify the said sureties against their said suretyship. Judgment was confessed on this bond 11 October 1814, for $8,000; John M. Wolfe sued the guardian bond afsd. and recovered judgment against the said sureties on 11 Oct. 1827 for $688 90. On 21 Jan. 1828, This judgment was entered “satisfied” by Edward L. Wells, attorney for J. M. Wolfe. Thomas C. Waples and Isaac Waples sued out a scire facias on this judgment of $8,000, entered as afsd. on the bond of indemnity and on the 21 January 1830 recovered judgment by default which they endorsed for $792 93 and they now claim that sum with interest. This judgment was opened on the application of the defts. and the question on this trial was to what extent the said sureties had been damnified.

. The defts. counsel now called Edward L. Wells the attorney of John M. Wolfe to prove that he had not received the whole amount of Wolfe’s judgment for which he had so entered satisfaction. This was objected to, and the court said they would not allow Mr. Wells the attorney, to contradict his entry on the record; but they said if the deft, could prove *aliunde*that the Waples’ did not pay the whole amount of that judgment to John M. Wolfe they might do it and by paroi. The question here is to what extent have plffs. been damnified, that is how much money have they been compelled to pay on *136account of their suretyship. The entry of satisfaction on this judgment shows *prima facie*that plffs. paid the amount of it; this may be rebutted but not by Wolfe’s attorney who entered the satisfaction.

The plff. had a verdict for $926 12.
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-10157 Summary Calendar

REBECCA REID, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus BETTY STILES, Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas No. 3:09-CR-109-1

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *

Rebecca Reid appeals the dismissal of her claim against Betty Stiles, U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D July 25, 2 011 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Pursua nt to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t hasd ete rm inedt hat this op inion s houldnot * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-10157 Document: 00511549645 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/25/2011No. 11-10157

former Johnson County Justice of the Peace, for a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Stiles terminated Reid from her position as a co u rt c l e rk , which Reid

1 argues was cruel and usual punishment. Eighth Amendment violations, however, do not arise “until after [the State] has secured a formal a d j u di c a t i on of guilt in accordance w i th du e p rocess of law. Where the State seeks to impose punishment without such an adjudication, the pertinent constitutional guarantee is the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” Ingraham v. Wright , 430 U.S. 651, 671 n.40 (1977). Because Stiles merely terminated Reid’s employment, the Eighth Amendment’s protections are inapplicable. AFFIRMED.

Reid ass ert ed s evera l otherclaim s, in cluding vio lati ons of t he Fift h and Fourt eent h 1 Ame ndm ents , but sheap pea ls only the dis mis salof he r Eighth Ame ndm ent clai m. 2 Case: 11-10157 Document: 00511549645 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/25/2011
#### Jeffrey A. JACKSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-401.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 9, 1973.

Jeffrey A. Jackson, in pro. per.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before PEARSON and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, 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 this 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.
**Exhibit 31.2 — CERTIFICATION**I, Michael El-Hillow, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Evergreen Solar, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) andinternal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:          (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;          (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal controlover financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assuranceregarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements forexternal purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;          (c) 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          (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors:          (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 who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:August 2, 2007       /s/ Michael El-Hillow         Michael El-Hillow    Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.11

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Barrick Gold Corporation (the Company) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, its annual report on
Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (the Report).

I, Shaun A. Usmar, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:



| | a) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 27, 2015



|                   |  |                                                            
|------------------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Shaun A. Usmar
|Name:              |  | Shaun A. Usmar                                             
|Title:             |  | Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                        REQUIRED BY RULE 13A-14(B) OF THE
                SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED, AND
                 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of International Wire Group,
Inc. (the "Company "), hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that:

      (i)   the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter
ended June 30, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended; and

      (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated: August 10, 2007                  /s/ GLENN J. HOLLER
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Name:  Glenn J. Holler
                                      Title: Senior Vice President, Chief
                                             Financial Officer (Principal
                                             Financial and Accounting Officer)
                                             and Secretary