alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 2, 2023

No. 04

- 22

- 00391

- CR

Juan Antonio RIVERA

, Appel lant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 379th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CR11753 Honorable Ron Rangel , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

After appellant’s new counsel was appointed, appellant’s brief was due December 7, 2022; however, neither the brief nor a motion for extension of time was filed. On December 8, 2022, the clerk of this court notified appellant’s counsel, Karl A. Basile, of the deficiency. The letter required a response by December 19, 2022

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(b)(2). We did not receive a response from counsel and the brief was not filed. Thereafter, on January 6, 2023, we ordered appellant’s counsel to file the brief by January 17, 2023. Counsel has not filed either a

brief or a motion for extension of time.

Therefore, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b)(2), we abate this case

to the trial court and order the trial court to conduct a hearing to answer the following questions:

1. Does appellant desire to prosecute his appeal?

2. Is appellant indigent?

a. If appellant is indigent, the trial court shall take such measures as may be necessary to assure the effective assistance of counsel, which may include the appointment of new counsel.

b. If the tr ial court finds that appellant is not indigent, the trial court should determine whether appellant has made the necessary arrangements for filing a brief.3. Has appointed or retained counsel abandoned the appeal? Because initiating contempt proceedi ngs against appellant’s counsel may be necessary, the trial

court should address this issue even if new counsel is retained or substituted before the date of the hearing. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8 (b)(4).

The trial court may, in its discretion, receive e vidence on the first two questions by sworn affidavit from appellant. The trial court shall, however, order appellant’s counsel to be present at the hearing.

We order the trial court to file its written findings of fact and conclusions of law with the

tri al court clerk no later than March 6, 2023 . We order the trial court clerk to file a supplemental clerk’s record in this court no later than March 14, 2023

. We further order the court reporter to file in this co urt a supplemental reporter’s record of the hearing, along with copies of any documentary evidence admitted, no later than twenty days after the date of the hearing

.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 2nd day of February, 2023

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                      20,624,795
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               29,631,063
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,918,869)
<INVENTORY>                                 35,309,341
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            89,629,062
<PP&E>                                      13,071,051
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,770,738
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             103,273,141
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       16,685,279
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    62,361,215
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,148,104
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               103,273,141
<SALES>                                     66,079,564
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            66,079,564
<CGS>                                       37,157,950
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               37,157,950
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            23,277,778
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (223,826)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,420,010
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,951,200)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,468,810
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,468,810
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.36


</TABLE>
#### Jack WALKER, d/b/a Blue Moon, Appellant, v. CASTLEWOOD INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, Inc., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Beyer & Brown Associates of Daytona Beach, Appellee.

No. J-449.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

June 4, 1968.

French C. Davis, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Joe M. Oglesby, Holly Hill, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an interlocutory appeal from an injunctive order entered against appellant. We have reviewed the record and briefs filed in this cause, and upon consideration thereof, it is our view that the appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error in the entry of the order appealed.

Accordingly, this interlocutory appeal is dismissed.

WIGGINTON, C. J.,- and CARROLL, DONALD K., and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS

E ASTLAND

, T EXAS

J UDGMENT

Charles Matlock, individually and * From the 35 th District
d/b/a Matlock Insurance Agency

, Court of Brown County,

Trial Court No. CV

- 1207249

.

Vs. No. 11

- 14

- 00159

- CV * October 2, 2014

Kenneth Fitzgerald and Gayle Fitzgerald * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

and Buford Narramore and (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Sharon Narramore

, Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that the appeal

should be dismissed for want of prosecution . Therefore, in accordance with this

court ’ s opinion, the appe al is dismissed. The costs incurred by reason of this appeal

are taxed against Charles Matlock.
|
|

|Exhibit 31.1                                                                                
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                            
|Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|                                                                                            
|CERTIFICATIONS                                                                              
|I, George W. Hamlin, IV, certify that:                                                      
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            
|                                                                                            

|                 |  |                                              
|---------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------
|February 8, 2007 |  | /s/ George W. Hamlin, IV                     
|Date             |  | George W. Hamlin, IV, President and Principal
|                 |  | Executive Officer
Exhibit 4.2


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We have issued our
report dated March 16, 2021, with respect to the financial statement of Advisors Disciplined Trust 2060 contained in Amendment
No. 1 to the Registration Statement on Form S-6 (File No. 333-251348) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned
report in the Registration Statement and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Experts”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


March 16, 2021
#### Jack RITTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-636.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 28, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

DA 23-0426 

JESUS VILLANUEVA, 

Petitioner and Appellant, 

v. ORDER 

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Respondent and Appellee. 

Appellant has filed an "early" motion for a 90-day extension of time to file his reply 

brief. He explains that due to his incarceration the 14-day time limit to file his reply brief 

will infringe on his due process rights. 

The Court notes that Appellee's brief has not yet been filed. Thus, pursuant to 

M. R. App. P. 12(3), Appellant's motion is premature. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for extension is DENIED. Appellant 

shall have 90 days from the date Appellee's brief is filed to file his reply brief. 

No further extensions will be granted. 

al-Cra ?-cfin 1 1 .2—n-1, For the Court, 

Chief Justice 

03/01/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0426
EXHIBIT 99 (b)  
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 
In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Canandaigua National Corporation for the period ending December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lawrence A. Heilbronner, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 
(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities 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. 
March 21, 2003 
/s/ Lawrence A. Heilbronner
Date 
Lawrence A. Heilbronner, Principal Financial and   
Accounting Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-12-00336-CV

Mark Phelps and Julia Phelps, Appellants

v.

Russell Parker; KPK Ventures, Ltd., and KPKM, Inc., Appellees

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, 368TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. 10-1028-C368, HONORABLE BURT CARNES, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Mark Phelps and Julia Phelps have failed to prosecute this appeal. Appellants’ brief

was due on July 5, 2012. On July 31, 2012 this Court’s clerk sent appellants a notice informing them

that their brief was overdue and cautioned that the appeal could be dismissed for want of prosecution

unless they filed a response reasonably explaining their failure to file a brief. Appellants responded

indicating a misunderstanding regarding the due date for the brief, but did not file a brief. On

September 10, 2012, this Court’s clerk sent appellants a second notice informing them that their

brief, which was due on July 5, was overdue and again cautioned that the appeal could be dismissed

for want of prosecution unless they filed a response reasonably explaining the failure to file a brief.

That response was due by September 20, 2012. Appellants have not responded to the notice, nor

have they filed a brief. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R.

App. P. 42.3(b), (c).
_____________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Rose and Goodwin

Dismissed for Want of Prosecution

Filed: November 9, 2012

2
Township or other

division of county 200...

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE—BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Incorporated sso Tact Lagehis, Cy Si 22S. ee sh

sent Blocks Now LPT.72  tastitation -

:
‘Decne af HRSA ott Sony gg wise) ectrin new Kec)

MXEIDABCE, APRIL 1, 1986

POPULATION SCHEDULE

B.D.No 6O—-*

8 D.mo, CL
Enumerated ky oe on Ey 7 ____, 19%

oa Auks £

PERSOKS © YSARS OLD AND OVER—IEPLOTMENT STAT J

Z | eu eves 70 trotvon,
1, Bares oot
‘Write “Ah” afier Samwan of xb

& Ckildceo
Weil Yaa oat Doe

uepecuaily abeemt from tremdald
reas,

ice & yon of age, Weibs “tate
(‘Stes gine « Sem memes.

edidase

Piece nrn
rine

iy no
eee
Senate Gls Ll posed ration SO ay a

:

leang
if

"aie WORE?
en me

,

r
ij
i

£

t
l

Hl

F

DXUUGTET, ARD CLAS OF WORERS
wyek co with » Te"
Waasdecnst
(Baa Cok 2 tap BT be Baw

fuienskinss

Se
eeu

Ears

bepurrer
Tetemw? or bsetanes, oo
wotten oil
retad gromecy

i
Sire, a

fe | Renter af wee somal in Eee
Teyaitceus fall-me woeba)

be { 2 Tndtinte wherkee|

ales CO

YF

os

Dias flare

Vy ery

umber of Perm Rebedsts

cmTM
Dm

BIS fo Fs [6 BR [| srmsencner

[An Bice

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.

he Ban nach, |e)
BS Re I ra

Porwa |

e

|

1

| ead
urfe

Si
i.

Xoxo

ae

T

innit

X0xo

4 Lo
Py

Xoxo

Pl?

Re
lo NV

R

“ey
72

z

XOXO

Stas sol
re

xoxo

23/

EEE 1S SEIS [8 1

aii

eT ISINTS TE
cS Ee S RE

i
i

R07

cep

mes

sif \

a - t — 4
36 ES

sey eS tess

7

* enero raees
sont |

SUPPLEMENTARY

p ROXY

a

OxD

fic]

-|7

ais

Se

7

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY—UO SOT WRITE IN THREE COLUMNS

QUESTIONS

Por Persons Rnumersied on Lines 14 and 39

io EE

‘VATAL OOTUPATION, IEDURTRI, 49) CAR OF WORKED

SS

thet
ie
a (eee aed previ wth pinnae “Nene Of, @ ant are Gale a ©

cm
ee

oH
O&

aa 3
yar Z ho
‘ VU

CLL TALUR OF NOME, TP OWNED: Gat 8 COTHE GR RAGE

aTMBOLS
4mD
EXFLANATORT
sores

7 ae

[>
‘a

(was os wurrorr ecrru
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1206

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 3, 1994

Referred to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation

AN ACT

To redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo

Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the ‘‘Frederick C.

Murphy Federal Center’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•S 1206 RFH

1 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

2 The Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road

3 in Waltham, Massachusetts, and known as the Waltham

4 Federal Center, shall be known and designated as the

5 ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

9 building referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

10 a reference to the ‘‘Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center’’.

Passed the Senate February 1 (legislative day, January 25), 1994.

Attest: WALTER J. STEWART,

Secretary.
SFM Certification in Canada 1999-2011

0

20406080

100120140160180

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

millions of hectares certified

SFIFSCCSA

0.4

5

17

28

120

86

124 

2011 Midyear

** Includes areas certified to draft standard for Great Lakes-St. Lawrence, Laurentian R

138

146

Sources: www.certificationcan www.pefc.org as of  www.sfiprogram.org

150

* Double counting of areas certified to more than one standard has been removed fro

143

58
- 8-8-58_1
- 8-8-58_2
262 La. 1089

#### Sandra Jean FAYARD wife of Mayer Jules HEIMAN v. Dr. Mayer Jules HEIMAN.

No. 52740.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 19, 1972.

In re: Dr. Mayer J. Heiman applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 263 So.2d 69.

Writ denied. There is no error of law in the judgment complained of.
Col. 15—Far

Cel p—ter all pues Se penne al eqpend over.

Form 15-6

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE—BUREAU OF THE CENSUS a “me 2 s Pd GO
cern Song ee FIFTEENTH CENSUS OF THE UNITED STATES: 1930 a
stole he.

village, town, or borough. ee

cum xi "Sots ee oy Pee Tr C7 POPULATION SCHEDULE Supervisor's District Mo. 7.
Township or other Unincorporated place... _ none eee _. Enumerated by me on lager. 2 » 1930, Cisse }ttihhsss415—— a9 oy

division of coun webs eitaciaiaabictpaapiaseiigt
(lusert prog etrcncsines. Speers name ¢ of class, as wewnsnip, we vwn, , precinc:, district, ae. See instructions.) (Enter name of any unincorporated place having approximately $00 inhabitants or more. See instructions ) (insert name of institution, if any, and indicate the lines on which the entries are made. ‘Bee instructions.)

State

PLACE OF ABODE NAME HOME DATA PERSONAL DESCRIPTION | EDUCATION PLACE OF BIRTH MOTHER ne (OR NATIVE | CITIZENSHIP, ETC.

RELATION
of each n whose place of abode on
A 1, 1930, waa in this family ——- of
Sater cumame Sort, Gon fhe geen nemeoant the ead ef ane i

middle insial, if any
Include every person living on, April 1; 1990. Omit family if
bern since April 1, 1930

OCCUPATION AND INDUSTRY

—_— —_

Piace of birth of each person enumerated and of his or her parents. If born in CODE
the United States, give ire Beate ot Territory. If of foreign birth, give country in

copE
33 OCCUPATION INDUSTRY

or race

in home before

PERSON United States a | Comey
a1 a | B

[20 SOOM 29) 291 Y
24

| 20

- * iil.
Prench from Canada-English, and Irish Free State from Northern Ireland work, as aptaney ton mil. ‘or mull, ry pte

Age at first
marriage

which birthplace wnew situated. (See Instructions.) Distinguish Canada- | /@nguage spoken | (For office use only. i lf sit | Trade, profession, or particular | Industry or business, as cot- ey | S
4
23

3
5
24

&

tard ghesd. isa Mp. Xpcd. ie
__ ¢ | J.

7 nr ct 7 x 4

'
'

SEE Ele lco

thorny Ws —_= } Score
[ , j r, % é f

CU fro en | CLAY

abt-tyr

4
Nt tae

© [oo isa [om [or im [oe [eo

ee cae Vi 4 an Ie "haidk =m. oa: TOROS
“A Fee Leg a
- Go (a

bn i

—

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.

4.

ABBREVIATIONS TO BE USED oe Col, 9—Radio set RB
IN COLUMNS INDICATED: "-an ee

the radio set.
abbreviations fer State er coentry of birth te
[Use no C 18, 19, 20 $2) re oi ° Cab 1) pe

= _——  ——————
261 La. 826

#### CITY OF MONROE v. Lonnie F. WILHITE.

No. 52402.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 11, 1972.

In re: The City of Monroe applying for certiorari or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Ouachita. 259 So.2d 415.

Writ denied. No error of law on the facts found by the court of appeal.
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## December 30, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice



## 137103 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices



## v SC: 137103 COA: 284413 Wayne CC: 04-001269 TORIAL BROWN, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 22, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

1215 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 30, 2008

Clerk
#### Michael SACKMAN, Appellant, v. LAND SERVICES SEBRING, INC., Appellee.

No. 71-724.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 28, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### William Mason GOODALE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-651.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

Oct. 24, 1969.

Appeal dismissed.
#### PEERLESS INVESTMENT CORPORATION, Appellant, v. SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, a public corporation, Appellee.

No. 72-757.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 20, 1974.

Appeal dismissed.