alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Edward Willard RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-500.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 22, 1971.

D. Turner Matthews, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and P. A. Pacyna, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

LILES, Acting Chief Judge.

Appellant was charged with larceny of an automobile, and entered a plea of guilty. He was sentenced to three years in prison. Prior to the sentencing, he had spent 116 days in jail. After his imprisonment for the three year term, appellant filed a motion asking the trial court to give him credit for the 116 days previously spent in jail. The trial court denied this motion and the appellant entered this appeal.

Florida Statute 921.161, F.S.A. is controlling on this point. This statute reads in pertinent part as follows:

> “However, a judge imposing such a sentence *may*allow the defendant credit thereon for all or any part of the time spent by him in the county jail prior to sentence.” (Emphasis added.)

This statute makes it clear that the granting of credit for jail time served prior to sentencing is a matter within the discretion of the trial judge. We do not believe the trial judge abused his discretion under the statute.

Appellant relies on Dunn v. United States, 4th Cir. 1967, 376 F.2d 191, as requiring credit for present custody. *Dunn*applies to federal crimes wherein the offense is against the United States government as distinguished from those offenses where the defendant is sentenced pursuant to and under the authority of the State of Florida. This court in Miles v. State, Fla. App.1968, 214 So.2d 101, held that a defendant was not entitled, as a matter of right, to credit for pre-sentence jail time.

The Miles case and the Florida statute are controlling in this matter. For these reasons the judgment and sentence of the trial judge is therefore affirmed.

HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                              5

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                      9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                            DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                               JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                 SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                                        12,762,196
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                    995,114
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     242,901
<INVENTORY>                                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              16,632,078
<PP&E>                                                         1,469,678
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   701,693
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                33,243,688
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         24,359,397
<BONDS>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                             97,986
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                          99,724
<OTHER-SE>                                                     8,355,176
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  33,243,688
<SALES>                                                       27,443,282
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              27,443,282
<CGS>                                                         19,763,332
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 24,121,472
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                (297,961)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                50,240
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                3,569,531
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   1,095,289
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            2,474,242
<DISCONTINUED>                                                (2,654,707)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                    (180,465)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                        (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      (0.01)


</TABLE>
* 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. 06-41042

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

FREDDY LIONEL ROMERO-VENTURA

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:05-CR-2529-ALL

Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Freddy Lionel Romero-Ventura (Romero) appeals the 41-month sentence

he received following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry, in violation of

8 U.S.C. §1326. In light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), Romero

challenges the constitutionality of § 1326(b)’s treatment of prior felony and

aggravated felony convictions as sentencing factors rather than elements of the

offense that must be found by a jury. This court has held that this issue is “fully

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 12, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-41042

2

foreclosed from further debate.” United States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d

624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202).

AFFIRMED.
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 Quarterly Report of MangoSoft, Inc. and Subsidiary (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2010, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
Selig Zises, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by 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/Dennis
      GoettChief Executive OfficerMay
      17, 2010





This
certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to
the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
pertaining to the Paracelsus Healthcare Corporation 1996 Stock Incentive Plan,
as amended (Form S-8 No. 33-10299) and pertaining to various stock option plans
of Paracelsus Healthcare Corporation (Form S-8 No. 33-12331) of our report
dated April 14, 1997, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of Paracelsus Healthcare Corporation included in the Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.



                                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Houston, Texas
April 14, 1997
<PAGE>



                                                                    Exhibit 31.2

        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT


I, Richard G. Chleboski, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this 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 or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and 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 maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, 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 financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant'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 a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.


Date: August 12, 2003
                                              /s/ Richard G. Chleboski
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Richard G. Chleboski
                                              Chief Financial Officer
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

TRONNEAL MANGUM , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 19

- 2980

[ December 12, 2019 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Kirk Volker , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 1997

- CF

- 001373

- A

.
Tronneal Mangum, Indiantown, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

L EVINE , CJ., G ROSS an d C IKLIN , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### JOHN POTTER, sen., *vs.*JOHN HYNDMAN.

Indentures executed by the Orphans9 Court of Maryland not sufficient evidence with* out the law authorizing such court to bind»

Action on the case for harboring an apprentice.

Plea. Not Guilty. Issue.

To prove the plff’s. right to the service of the apprentice the plff. gave in evidence an indenture of apprenticeship executed by the Orphans’ Court of the state of Maryland for the city of Baltimore, binding the boy to plff. as a poor child.

*Bayard,*for plff. moved a nonsuit.

The action is for harboring an apprentice. The plea puts in issue the whole declaration, of course denies the plff’s right to the services of the boy. He produces an indenture by the Orphans’ Court of Maryland. By what authority did this court bind him? Plff. must either show a common law right; or, if he goes upon a statutory right, he must show the statute. The foreign law on this subject is matter of evidence. The authority to bind a boy must depend on statutory provisions. It is not a common law right; at common law the father is entitled to the services of the boy. I don’t say the record is not evidence, but that the law authorizing the binding must, be shewn.

*Hamilton,*for the plff.

insisted that the action of the court in Maryland on this subject was entitled to full credit and their jurisdiction would be implied.

*Hamilton,*for plff. *Bayard,*for deft.

*By the Court.*

—This is not the common case of a judgment recovered in the courts of another state. It is a binding by the Orphans’ Court acting under a peculiar jurisdiction given by statute. That statute ought to be given in evidence that the court may see it warrants the procéeding. 1 *Ch. Pl. 223; Stark.*569. *(Sed Quere.)*

Judgment of nonsuit.
Nir | ? ea Inquiries numbered 7, 16, and 17 are not to be asked in-respect to infants. Inquiries numbered 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are to be answered (if at all)
P ape No. 4 5 ‘ | merely by an affirmative mark, as /.

ScuEpuLe 1.—Inhahitants in 77 dal bapa _____, in the County of _ Erothigs ty. _. —_, State

( , enumerated by me on the 2 day of #x«<< , 1870.

of y 7 ?
Post ofice AZ # ¢ 2A BL. oe LE, Asst Marshal.

Epuca-:! CONSTITUTIONAL
TION, RELATIONS.

| VALUE OF REAL ESTATE
OWNED.

PARENTAGE. |

=)
&
=
4
Z

|

4 | 2) years of age and up- |

l
e is
n

&c,)

nin re.

Whether deaf
and dumb,

}
'
!

Place of Birth, naming State
or Territory of U. §.; or the
Country, if of foreign birth.

Profession, Occupation,
or Trade of each person,

male or female.

The name of every person whose
place of abode on the first day of
. June, 1870, was in this family.

W.), Black| 2
M.), Chi-

an (T,)
Feb., &c.)
Feb.,

ds
F.)

blind, insane,
or idiotic.

of visitation.

Females
- =

the order of visitation.

month (Jan.,
vellion or oth

month (Jan.,

wards,

Families, numbered in the order
Wms 1. —
Color.—W hite (

Value of Personnl Estate.
If married within the year, state
Attended school within the year

under] year, give months
Male Citizens of U.S. of

Dwelling-houses, numbered in
in fractions, thus, -',.

| Age at Inst Dirth-day, If

ie. |

:

Father of foreign birth.
Mother of foreign birth.

Sex.—Males (1
(B,), Mulatto
nese (C,), Indi

Cannot write.

Cannot rend.
e
denied
othe

mt =| If born within the yeur, state

@ | Value of Real Estate.

|
wm | wh

eo
=
ay
—"
tw

3

Aycd of

—
Ww
Nahe
wel
nes
a=
; ur
=
a)

il—

|

S
8
N
IN
S.

w

\

ww

ni

i

i

INS
x

|

~
a

:

a

nF

|

|\I72

Nt

Historic census records are maintained and released by the National Archives and Records Administration, not the U.S. Census Bureau.

Visit http://www.archives.gov for more information about publicly available records like the one shown here.

Abd W\ $renebing
Lin IW Bore
y;
Vy

,

MedgG a
oe
ef! Fane

No. of dwellings, of No. of ditetnaie 28 No. of males, foreign born, Ly

“« * colored mates, “« “ females, ‘ nd )
ae “ke sé

females, “«* * blind,

—— — — ——— —
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1348 

To reauthorize the Congressional Award Act. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 23, 2013 

Mr. CARPER (for himself and Mr. COONS) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Congressional Award Act. 

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 ‘‘Congressional Award 

5 Program Reauthorization Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. TERMINATION. 

7 Section 108 of the Congressional Award Act (2 

8 U.S.C. 808) is amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2013’’ 

9 and inserting ‘‘October 1, 2018’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105-3901

OFFICE OFTHE REGIONALADMINISTRATOR 

## JUN 3 0 2011 The HonorableJefferson Keel President ofthe National Congress ofAmerican Indians 1516 P Street, Northwest Washington, DC 20005 Dear President Keel: Thank you for Resolution RAP-l0-011 passed by the National Congress ofAmerican Indians at the General Assembly ofthe 2010 Mid-Year Session onJune 20

- 23,2011 that requests the United States Environmental Protection Agency undertake an active and complete consultation process with each ArizonaTribe in making its BART Determination for theNavajo Generating Station. The EPA is currently conducting an economic analysis to infonn ourdetermination ofthe appropriate control technology as BART for NGS. Because ofthe potential impact ofourrulemaking onTribes, in accordance with the Federal trust obligation to Indian Tribes and EPA's May 4, 2011 consultation policy, I have invited each ArizonaTribe to engage in government-to-government consultation with the EPA. Consultation between the leaders ofthe Tribe and senior management at the EPA is critical for the EPA to fully understand the unique impact this rulemaking may have on Tribes. Because the EPA Region IX is developing the Federal Implementation Plan to implementthe BART requirement for NGS, Administrator Lisa P. Jackson has determined that consultation should occur within the region. I am committed to consulting with all affected Tribes that request government-to-government consultation prior to ourproposed rulemaking. Ifyou have additional questions orconcerns, please contact Ms. Colleen McKaughan, Associate Directorfor the Air Division, at (520) 498-0118, or Mr. Nate Lau, Associate Director for the Communities and Ecosystems Division, at (415) 972-3839. Sincerely,

Printedon Recycled Paper
EXHIBIT 32
 
 
 CERTIFICATION BY CEO AND CFO PURSUANT


TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT










CERTIFICATION




The undersigned hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010 of BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION (the “Company”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




A signed original of this written statement required by 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 BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION and will be retained by BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





This Certification is not “filed” for the purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  This Certification is not incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.








Date:  March 31, 2011





/s/ Wayne E. Ahart


Name: Wayne E. Ahart


Titles: Chairman of the Board of Directors


and Chief Executive Officer


BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION





Date:  March 31, 2011




/s/ Barry N. Shamas


Name: Barry N. Shamas


Titles: Executive Vice President,


Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer


BNL FINANCIAL CORPORATION
#### Beecher Beatrice WHISENANT, etc., Appellant, v. Claudius Elbert CURETON et al., Appellees.

No. 74-28.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Jan. 30, 1974.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Palm Beach County; James R. Knott, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 10(t)


                                                                     EXHIBIT III
December 7, 1998



Walbridge Coatings, an
  Illinois Partnership
c/o MSC Walbridge Coatings, Inc.
30610 East Broadway
Walbridge, OH  43465-0550

Re:  Sublease dated as of May 30, 1986 between
     MSC Pre Finish Metals Inc., as Sublessor, and
     Walbridge Coatings, an Illinois Partnership, as
     Sublessee (the "Sublease")

Dear Sir:

This letter shall evidence the agreement of MSC Pre Finish Metals Inc. and
Walbridge Coatings, an Illinois Partnership to extend the expiration of the term
of the Sublease from December 31, 1998 to December 31, 2001.



Very truly yours,

MSC PRE FINISH METALS INC.


By: _____________________________
     James J. Waclawik, Sr.
     Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
     and Secretary
<PAGE>

Walbridge Coatings, an
 Illinois Partnership
December 7, 1998
Page Two




Agreed as of the date first written above:

WALBRIDGE COATINGS,
  AN ILLINOIS PARTNERSHIP


BY:  MSC WALBRIDGE COATINGS INC.,
     A General Partner


By: _________________________________________
     James J. Waclawik, Sr.
     Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
     and Secretary


By:  EGL STEEL INC.,
     A General Partner


By: _________________________________________
     David M. Beckwith
     Counsel
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of Global Preferred Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned hereby 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: May 14, 2004                               /s/ Edward F. McKernan
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Edward F. McKernan
                                                 Chief Executive Officer

                                       1