alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## IN THE COU RT O F CR IM IN AL AP PE ALS OF T E XAS
N o. PD - 1598- 06 R I C H A R D R O BL ES V I G I L, A ppe l l ant

v . THE S TA TE OF TE X AS ON S TATE’ S PET I TI ON FOR DI S CRETI ON ARY REVI EW FROM THE FOUR TEENTH CO URT O F AP PEALS

HA RRI S CO UNTY P ercur iam . O P I N I O N App e l l a n twas p l a c e do n d e f e rr e d a d j u d i c a t i o n p r o b a t i o n a n d g u i l twas l at er
a d ju d ica ted a n d A p p e llan t w a s c o n v icte d o f in d e c e n c yw ith a c h ild . A p p e llan t a ttem p ted to
ap p e a l th e a d

ju d ica tio n o f g u ilt a rg u in g th a t th e trial c o u rt e rre d in n o t s ua s ponte hol di ng a hear i ng on hi s compet ency . T he C ourtof A ppeal s di s m i s s ed, fi ndi ng thatther e w as no j ur i s di ct i on t o cons i derthe i s s ue pur s uantt o C ode of Cri m i nal Pr ocedur e A rt i cl e 42. 12, § 5 (b ). V igil v . S ta te , N o . 1 4 -05 -01 0 1 5 -C R (T ex . A p p . – H o u ston [1 4 th], Ju ly1 3 , 2 0 0 6 ). Ap p e l l a n tp e t i t i o n e d th i s Co u rtf o rd i s c r e t i o n a ryr e v i e w.2

W h e n th e C o u rt o f A p p e a ls i ss u e d its o p in io n in th is ca se , it d idso w ith o u t th e b e n e f it of thi s C ourt ’ s r ece ntopi ni on i n D u r g a n v . S ta te , ___ S. W
. 3d ___, N o. PD
- 1069- 06 ( T ex. C rim . A p p . N o v e m b e r 7 , 2 0 0 7 ). T h e re f o re , w e v a c a te th e ju d g m e n t o f th e C o u rt o f

A p p e a ls and re m and forthatcourtt o cons i derthe ef fec tof D ur

gan , i f any , on i t s r eas oni ng and anal y s i s i n thi s cas e.

E n banc D el i ver ed: February6, 2008 D o N ot Pub l i sh
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

                Theundersigned hereby certify that pursuant to the provisions of 18 U.S.C.1350(a), the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2005 (the “Form 10-Q”) of Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc., a Delawarecorporation (the “Company”), fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and thatinformation contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company atand for the periods indicated.

 

Dated:  October 28, 2005

 
|   | By:    | /s/ DAVID J. BARRETT                   |   |
|--------|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name:  | David J. Barrett                       |
|   | Title: | President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/ HARRY T. HAWKS                          |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name:  | Harry T. Hawks                              |
|   | Title: | Vice President and Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----
Exhibit 32.2



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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sara Lee Corporation
(the Company) for the fiscal year ended July 2, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, L.M. (Theo) de Kool, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial and
Administrative Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.



|                                                                      
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: September 2, 2005                                              
|                                                                      
|/s/ L.M. (Theo) de Kool,                                              
|Executive Vice President and Chief Financialand Administrative Officer
NO. 07-06-0186-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

AUGUST 9, 2006

______________________________

ROBERT EARL PATTERSON, APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________

FROM THE 108th DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY;

NO. 52,286-E; HONORABLE ABE LOPEZ, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before REAVIS and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Pursuant to a plea of guilty, appellant Robert Earl Patterson was convicted of

possession of a controlled substance, enhanced. Proceeding pro se, appellant filed notice

of appeal challenging the conviction.

We have received a certification of right of appeal by which the trial court certified

that the underlying case was a plea-bargain case with no right of appeal. By letter, dated

July 12, 2006, this Court notified appellant that the certification indicated that he had no

right of appeal. In this letter, we further notified appellant that the appeal was subject to
2

dismissal unless he provided this Court with an amended certification providing that he has

the right of appeal or otherwise demonstrates that there exists other grounds for continuing

the appeal by August 1, 2006. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d); Stowe v. State, 124

S.W.3d 228, 232 (Tex.App.–El Paso 2003, no pet.). No amended certification reflecting

a right to appeal has been filed and appellant has failed to demonstrate other grounds for

continuing the appeal. 

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Mackey K. Hancock

 Justice

Do not publish.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                                  TEKGRAF, INC.

                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                    (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                  FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                          JUNE 30,
                                                    2000             1999
                                                    ----             ----
<S>                                              <C>              <C>
Net loss                                         $     (585)       $     (109)

Basic and diluted weighted average number of
  common shares                                   6,161,664         6,161,664

Basic and diluted net loss per share             $    (0.09)       $    (0.02)
                                                 ==========        ==========
</TABLE>
#### Earl Fred MOSES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 67-394.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

June 5, 1968.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Table 2.  Rental and Homeowner Vacancy Rates, by Area:  Fourth Quarter 1999 



                                    Rental vacancy rates


                             Fourth       Fourth      Standard     Standard
Area                         quarter      quarter     error on     error on
                              1999         1998       1999 rate   difference


United States..........         7.9          7.8          0.2          0.3

  Inside MAs...........         7.7          7.5          0.2          0.3
    In central cities..         8.2          8.0          0.3          0.4
    Not in central cities
    (suburbs)..........         7.1          6.9          0.3          0.4
  Outside MAs..........         9.6          9.3          0.5          0.7

 Northeast.............         5.3          6.1          0.4          0.5
 Midwest...............         9.0          8.0          0.5          0.6
 South.................        10.2          9.5          0.3          0.5
 West..................         6.1          6.6          0.3          0.5



                                    Homeowner vacancy rates


                            Fourth       Fourth      Standard     Standard
Area                        quarter      quarter     error on     error on
                             1999         1998       1999 rate   difference


United States..........         1.6          1.8          0.1          0.1

  Inside MAs...........         1.5          1.7          0.1          0.1
    In central cities..         1.8          2.3          0.1          0.2
    Not in central cities
    (suburbs)..........         1.4          1.5          0.1          0.1
  Outside MAs..........         2.0          1.9          0.1          0.2

 Northeast.............         1.5          1.3          0.1          0.2
 Midwest...............         1.0          1.5          0.1          0.2
 South.................         2.0          2.1          0.1          0.1
 West..................         1.8          1.8          0.1          0.2
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases 2010 Census
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB10-CN.10 **Contact:**  Eun Kim
Public Information Office
(301) 763-3030 (phone)
(301) 763-3762 (fax)
(301) 457-1037 (TDD)PIO@census.gov
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  WEDNESDAY, JAN. 20, 2010 Media Advisory — First Enumeration for 2010 Census Begins in Noorvik, Alaska Census takers must get a head start in Noorvik and other villages in remote Alaska before residents leave for hunting and fishing grounds and while the ground is frozen, which allows access to the region by bush plane, dogsled and snowmobile. Residents of Anchorage, Fairbanks and other larger Alaska cities will receive 2010 Census questionnaires by mail in mid-March like the rest of the country.
    
  A live satellite uplink will be available from noon to 2 p.m. (Alaska Time). Groves will be available to the media before and following the enumeration. However, by law, the Census Bureau cannot allow reporters or photographers to accompany the director or other census workers during the actual count to protect the confidentiality of respondents. For more information about the 2010 Census, please visit <2010census.gov>.
  CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
# C_2012165EN.01000101.xml

| 9.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/1

---

2012/C 165/01

Last publication of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 157, 2.6.2012

OJ C 157, 2.6.2012

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 151, 26.5.2012

OJ C 138, 12.5.2012

OJ C 133, 5.5.2012

OJ C 126, 28.4.2012

OJ C 118, 21.4.2012

OJ C 109, 14.4.2012

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
#### Wilbert PARKER, Individually and on behalf of his minor daughter, Patrice Junius v. SINCLAIR AND WARD REALTY COMPANY, Lois Yaeger and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co.

No. 8983.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.

April 11, 1978.

Orlando G. Bendana, New Orleans, for Wilbert Parker, plaintiff-appellant.

Daniel R. Martiny, of Edwards, Porteous & Lee, Gretna, for Lois Yaeger, defendant-appellee.

Before GULOTTA, STOULIG and BOU-TALL, JJ.

BOUTALL, Judge.

Wilbert Parker sued Lois Yaeger and others for damages arising out of an intersec-tional collision. The trial court found Yae-ger to be negligent and Parker to be con-tributorily negligent, dismissing his suit. He appeals. The only issue before us is the contributory negligence of Parker.

*1374Parker was driving his automobile westerly on the West Bank Expressway in Gret-na and stopped in obedience to a red traffic light at its intersection with Terry Parkway. Yaeger, who had been stopped on Terry Parkway waiting for a light change, proceeded across the intersection behind other vehicles, and as she attempted to cross the far lanes of the expressway, Parker started his vehicle up and collided with her right side. The cause of the collision revolves about the operation of the traffic semaphore which was determined to be changing at a rate more rapid than its normal sequence. Yaeger claims she was properly in the intersection, having started on the green light, the light having turned yellow as she neared the median of the expressway, and was entitled to proceed across the westerly lanes to clear the intersection. As opposed to this, Parker contends that he looked both ways at the intersection to make sure that it was clear, that the vehicle to his left proceeded across, and then he proceeded across, that Yaeger approached rapidly from the left and struck his vehicle.

The resolution of this issue depends largely upon the credibility of the witnesses, and the trial court in his reasons for judgment relied mainly upon the sequence of events as related by Yaeger, and stated that Parker did not discharge his duty to look and see that the intersection was clear. We agree with the findings of the trial judge. The testimony of Parker as to how the collision happened is contrary to the physical facts of damages on the automobiles involved. Additionally, it seems improbable, under his testimony, that the Yae-ger vehicle would have missed the automobile Parker places ahead of him in the left lane and be able to strike Parker on the side as he related.

LSA-R.S. 32:232(l)(a) requires a vehicle facing the green signal, before starting into that intersection, to yield the right of way to other vehicles lawfully within the intersection. See also *Potts v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company,*135 So.2d 77, (La.App. 2d Cir. 1961); and *McMullan*v. *Travelers Insurance Company,*311 So.2d 902 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1975). We affirm the ruling appealed from.

*AFFIRMED.*
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

          - [Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0076]

# AGENCY:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        NHTSA published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         of July 17, 2017, concerning request for comments on drugs that impair safe driving. The document had an incorrect docket number.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Compton, 202-366-2699.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of July 17, 2018, in FR Doc. 2018-15209, on page 33305 in the second column, correct the “Docket No.” to read:                

## [Docket No. NHTSA-2018-0076]

July 19, 2018

Authority:44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A).

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 3, 2018.

Jeff Michael,

Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.

[FR Doc. 2018-16952 Filed 8-7-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
254 La. 141

#### M. A. HOLAHAN, Trustee in the matter of Paul J. Durand v. Veronica GUIROVICH, wife of/and Paul J. DURAND, et al.

No. 49841.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 9, 1969.

In re: Mrs. Veronica Guirovich Durand et al. applying for certiorari, or writ of review to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**Certificate of theChief Executive OfficerPursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

I, Clark A. Marcus, Chief ExecutiveOfficer certify that:

-  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-QSB of Eye Care International, Inc.;  
-   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this quarterly report;  
-  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in the quarterly report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report;   
-  The registrant’s other certifying officer and Iare responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for theregistrant and have: 

> -  Designed such disclosure controls and proceduresto ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  
-  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to thefiling date of this quarterly report (the “Evaluation Date”); and  
-  Presented in this quarterly report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and proceduresbased on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date; 

-  The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant’sauditors and audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): 

> -  All significant deficiencies in the design oroperation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and haveidentified for the registrant’s auditors any material weaknesses in internalcontrols; and  
-  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal controls; and 

-   The registrant’s other certifying officers and Ihave indicated in this quarterly report whether there were significant changesin internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affectinternal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation,including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses. 

Date:  February 1, 2004

|  | /s/ *Clark A.  Marcus*                  Clark A. MarcusChief Executive Officer |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### John Joseph GIORDANO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-577.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 5, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT 99 OF CONSOLIDATED NATURAL
GAS COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    3,008,263
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                  1,069,037
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                       1,393,021
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       364,635
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                 165,649
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,000,605
<COMMON>                                       261,068
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                      496,722
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          1,424,624
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               2,205,152
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,426,315
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 374,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  104,000
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               1,913,876
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                6,000,605
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                    3,794,309
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           155,830
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   3,246,335
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   3,402,165
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        392,144
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               9,304
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 401,448
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       103,175
<NET-INCOME>                                   298,273
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  298,273
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       183,671
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      103,257
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         407,165
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.11
        


</TABLE>
# isp