alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Devon Simmons, Appellant.

[735 NYS2d 744]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel FitzGerald, J.), rendered December 10, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first and second degrees and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 18 years, 5 years and 10 years, respectively, and judgment, same court (Brenda Soloff, J.), rendered December 17, 1999, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a concurrent term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The requisite intent for each crime, as well as *275defendant’s lack of justification, was established by credible evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that defendant carefully aimed and repeatedly fired at the fleeing victims (see, *People v McNamee,*266 AD2d 162, *lv denied*94 NY2d 905). The evidence also established that one victim, whose health was still impaired at the time of trial, suffered serious physical injury, and the other victim, who testified as to his substantial pain, suffered physical injury.

The record fails to support defendant’s contention that the court improperly based its sentence on crimes of which he was acquitted. We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Williams, Saxe, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

                                 CERTIFICATION
                                      OF
                              PSB HOLDINGS, INC.
                UNDER SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


      The undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
PSB Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") certify pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that (1) the quarterly
report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d), and (2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

      Date: November 15, 2004

                                           DAVID K. KOPPERUD
                                           David K. Kopperud
                                           President and CEO


                                           SCOTT M. CATTANACH
                                           Scott M. Cattanach
                                           Treasurer
                                           (Chief Financial Officer)
#### George C. Miller Brick Co., Inc., Appellant, v Stark Ceramics, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendant.

[722 NYS2d 679]

*961Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment but erred in granting the motion of Stark Ceramics, Inc. (defendant) for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against it. On this record, there is a triable issue of fact whether defendant violated the Donnelly Antitrust Act (General Business Law § 340 *et seq.).*In particular, the distribution agreement, a letter from defendant’s representative to the distributors, and the deposition testimony of the parties raise issues of fact concerning how and when the distributors could bid on projects outside their territories and whether distributors were intended to bid, if at all, on the State project. In addition, the specifics of the telephone conversation between representatives from plaintiff and defendant concerning bidding on the State project are in dispute. We thus modify the order by denying the motion of defendant and reinstating the amended complaint against it. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Stander, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Lawton, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      16,818,973
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,139,984
<ALLOWANCES>                                   475,883
<INVENTORY>                                  1,159,937
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            23,027,900
<PP&E>                                     221,034,982 
<DEPRECIATION>                            (58,101,778)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             216,228,426
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       30,044,844
<BONDS>                                    206,978,022
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       20,765,930
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,128
<OTHER-SE>                                (41,618,246)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               216,228,426
<SALES>                                      6,213,409
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            51,700,079
<CGS>                                        2,908,786
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               42,958,769
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               297,841
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               106,406
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,820,115
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,580,158)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,580,158)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,580,158)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.93)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.93)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-92,539-01 & WR92,539-02

EX PARTE JESSE REYNA, Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. D-18-2471-CR & D-18-2472-CR 

IN THE 358 DISTRICT COURT FROM ECTOR COUNTY TH

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and evading arrest and was sentenced to

twenty years and ten years’ imprisonment. Applicant filed these applications for writs of habeas

corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded them to this Court. See TEX.

CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that his plea was involuntary because trial counsel failed to properly

investigate and the State withheld favorable evidence from the defense. Applicant has alleged facts

that, if true, might entitle him to relief. Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985); Ex parte Argent, 393

S.W.3d 781 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The trial court

is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial
2

court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claims. In developing the record, the trial

court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). If the trial court elects to hold a hearing,

it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. It appears Applicant is represented by counsel. If

Applicant is indigent and wants to be represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel

to represent him at the hearing. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is appointed or

retained, the trial court shall immediately notify this Court of counsel’s name.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whethertrial counsel’s

performance was deficient and Applicant would have insisted on a trial but for counsel’s alleged

deficient performance. The trial court shall also make findings regarding Applicant’s claim that the

prosecution withheld favorable evidence from the defense. The trial court may make any other

findings and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claims.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from

the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP.P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court.

Filed: April 28, 2021

Do not publish
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 21

- 00067

- CR

JOHN CHARLES DENELSBECK, III , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 8th District Court Delta County, Texas Trial Court No. 7735

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.2 O R D E R
Our review of the clerk ’s record and the court reporter’s record in th is matter indicates
that such record s contain un redacted “sensitive data” as that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the
Texas R ule s of Appellate Procedure. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 9.10(a). Sensitive data includes “ a birth date, a home address, and the name of any person who was a minor at the time the offense
was committed.” T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 9.10 (a)(3). The clerk’s and reporter’s r ec ord include the names of persons who were minors at the time the offense was commi tted. Rule 9.10(b) states, “Unless a court orders otherwise, an electronic or paper filing with the court, including the contents of any appendices, must not contain sensi ti ve data.” T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 9.10(b). Rule 9.10(f) provides, “A court may also orde r that a document be filed under seal in paper form or electronic form, without redaction.” T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 9.10(f). Therefore, because
the clerk’s and reporter’s record co ntain un redacted sensitive data, we order the clerk of this
Court , or her appointee, in accordance with Rule 9.10(f), to seal the electronically filed clerk’s
record and reporter’s record in th i s case. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 9.10(f).

IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT
Date: January 10 , 2022
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                       IRIDIUM WORLD COMMUNICATIONS LTD.


                  COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER CLASS A COMMON SHARE
                        (IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT SHARE DATA)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                            THREE MONTHS ENDED   NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                            SEPTEMBER 30, 1997   SEPTEMBER 30, 1997
                                                                            ------------------   ------------------
 <S>                                                                            <C>                 <C>
 Net loss applicable to Class A Common shares . . . . . . . . . . . . .         $      7,260        $       8,039
                                                                                ------------        -------------
 Weighted average number of Class A shares outstanding. . . . . . . . .           12,000,000            4,967,033
                                                                                ------------        -------------
 Net Loss per Class A Common Share. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .         $       0.61        $        1.62
                                                                                ============        =============
</TABLE>





                                       24
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1520 

To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate segments of the 

York River and associated tributaries for study for potential inclusion 

in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 18, 2013 

Mr. KING introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate 

segments of the York River and associated tributaries 

for study for potential inclusion in the National Wild 

and Scenic Rivers System. 

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 ‘‘York River Wild and 

5 Scenic River Study Act of 2013’’. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1520 IS

1 SEC. 2. YORK RIVER STUDY. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION FOR STUDY.—Section 5(a) of the 

3 Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1276(a)) is amend4 ed by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(141) YORK RIVER, MAINE.—The segment of 

6 the York River that flows 11.25 miles from the 

7 headwaters of the York River at York Pond to the 

8 mouth of the river at York Harbor, and any associ9 ated tributaries.’’. 

10 (b) STUDY AND REPORT.—Section 5(b) of the Wild 

11 and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1276(b)) is amended 

12 by adding at the end the following: 

13 ‘‘(20) YORK RIVER, MAINE.— 

14 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 3 years 

15 after the date on which funds are made avail16 able to carry out this paragraph, the Secretary 

17 of the Interior shall— 

18 ‘‘(i) complete the study of York River, 

19 Maine, described in subsection (a)(141); 

20 and 

21 ‘‘(ii) submit to the appropriate com22 mittees of Congress a report that describes 

23 the results of the study. 

24 ‘‘(B) REQUIREMENTS.—In conducting the 

25 study referred to in subparagraph (A)(i), the 

26 Secretary of the Interior shall— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1520 IS

1 ‘‘(i) determine the effect of the des2 ignation on— 

3 ‘‘(I) existing commercial and rec4 reational activities, such as hunting, 

5 fishing, trapping, recreational shoot6 ing, motor boat use, and bridge con7 struction; 

8 ‘‘(II) the authorization, construc9 tion, operation, maintenance, or im10 provement of energy production and 

11 transmission infrastructure; and 

12 ‘‘(III) the authority of State and 

13 local governments to manage the ac14 tivities described in subclause (I); and 

15 ‘‘(ii) identify— 

16 ‘‘(I) any authorities that would 

17 authorize or require the Secretary of 

18 the Interior— 

19 ‘‘(aa) to influence local land 

20 use decisions, such as zoning; or 

21 ‘‘(bb) to place restrictions on 

22 non-Federal land if designated 

23 under this Act; 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•S 1520 IS

1 ‘‘(II) any authorities that the 

2 Secretary of the Interior may use to 

3 condemn property; and 

4 ‘‘(III) any private property lo5 cated in the area studied under sub6 section (a)(141).’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1512 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1512

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1335 Jefferson Road in Rochester, New York, as the ``Specialist 
                 Theodore Matthew Glende Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 17, 2013

Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mrs. Gillibrand) introduced the following 
 bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland 
                   Security and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1335 Jefferson Road in Rochester, New York, as the ``Specialist 
                 Theodore Matthew Glende Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. SPECIALIST THEODORE MATTHEW GLENDE POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1335 Jefferson Road in Rochester, New York, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Specialist Theodore Matthew Glende Post 
Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Specialist 
Theodore Matthew Glende Post Office''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             828
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,561
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     14,590
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           3,215
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             3,333
<LOANS>                                        102,801
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,005
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 127,607
<DEPOSITS>                                      89,111
<SHORT-TERM>                                    15,929
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,320
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         8,495
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,752
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 127,607
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,299
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  281
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    22
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 2,602
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,042
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,313
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,289
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       24
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    783
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    633
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         633
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       414
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.17
<LOANS-NON>                                        863
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   951
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                        30
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,005
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             1,005
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, William B. Swint, Interim President and ChiefExecutive Officer of Cutter & Buck Inc., certify that:

1.     I havereviewed this Quarterly Report of Cutter & Buck Inc.;

2.     Based onmy 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, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a.      Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b.      Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and

c.      Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.      Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b.      Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
| Dated: December 10, 2004 |
|-------------------------------|
|                          | /s/ WILLIAM B.  SWINT |   |
|                          | William B. Swint |
|                          | *Interim President and Chief Executive Officer* |
|                          | *(Principal Executive Officer)* |

 

----