alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### AMERICAN CASUALTY CO. OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, v. GILBERT.

No. 38515.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 219 So.2d 84.
# **Exhibit31.2**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, John N. Spinney, Jr., Senior Vice PresidentChief Financial Officer, certify that:

1.               I have reviewedthis Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Investors Financial Services Corp.;

2.               Based on my knowledge, this report doesnot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

3.               Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this 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 thisreport;

4.               The registrant’s other certifying officerand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

(a)          Designed suchdisclosure 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)         [Paragraph omitted in accordancewith SEC transition instruction contained in SEC Release 34-47986.]

(c)          Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(d)         Disclosed in this report any change inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred duringthe registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

5.               The registrant’s other certifying officerand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

(a)          All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)         Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 12, 2003
| /s/  John N. Spinney, Jr.  |
|----------------------------|
| Senior  Vice President and |
| Chief  Financial Officer   |

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.2


                  CERTIFICATION OF THE 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Vodavi  Technology,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly  period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
David A. Husband, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of
my knowledge and belief,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (3)  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(a) or
          78o(d)); and

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


/s/ David A. Husband
-----------------------------------
David A. Husband
Chief Financial Officer and Vice
President-Finance
August 12, 2002
An official website of the United States government                

----

end of header

Census.govNewsroomReleasesCensus 2000

# Newsroom Archive

Skip left menu navigation                          - About the Newsroom
                          - Facts for Features
                          - **News Releases**
                          - Press Kits
                          - Tip Sheets

### Release Information

**CB01-CN.88**
**Contact:**  Public Information Office							301-457-3691/301-457-3620 (fax)	301-457-1037 (TDD)	e-mail: 2000usa@census.gov	Statistical Information Staff	Population Division	301-457-2422	e-mail: pop@census.gov

## FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  EMBARGOED UNTIL: 12:01 A.M. EDT, MAY 22, 2001 (TUESDAY)

## Census Bureau Releases Census 2000 Demographic Profile for Massachusetts

The U.S. Census Bureau today released the *Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: Census 2000* for Massachusetts, a one-page table providing Census 2000 data on age and sex distribution, race, Hispanic origin, household relationship and type, housing occupancy and tenure (whether the housing occupant owns or rents).

 The profile includes nearly 100 data items in all, plus percentage distributions.

 In addition to the profile of the state as a whole, similar demographic profiles for counties, places and other geographic components of the state can be accessed on an embargoed basis at <https://www.census.gov/dcmd/www/embargo/embargo_demoprofile.html>. After the release time, go to the Census Bureau's online search-and-retrieval database American FactFinder <http://factfinder2.census.gov> or to its Demographic Profile Page <https://www.census.gov/census2000/demoprofile.html>. You will also be able to download the profiles from the bureau's file transfer protocol site <http://www2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/demographic_profile/>.

 For information about how to order paper copies of Census 2000 demographic profiles, contact Customer Services Center, U.S. Census Bureau, 301-457-4100; or e-mail:<webmaster@census.gov>. 

 For local context, contact the Massachusetts State Data Center, 413-545-3460; e-mail: <miser@miser.umass.edu>.

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

Is this page helpful?
YesNo

NO THANKS

255 characters maximum255 characters maximum reached

Thank you for your feedback.Comments or suggestions? 

PIO@census.gov
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-8054

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

REGINALD ANTHONY FALICE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen,

Senior District Judge. (3:98-cr-00244-GCM-1)

Submitted: February 20, 2014 Decided: February 26, 2014

Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Reginald Anthony Falice, Appellant Pro Se. Gretchen C. F. 

Shappert, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; 

Paul Bradford Taylor, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 

Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Reginald Anthony Falice seeks to appeal the district 

court’s orders denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion as 

second or successive and his motion to correct tax assessment. 

We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the 

notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

When the United States or its officer or agency is a 

party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty 

days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or 

order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court 

extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or 

reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he 

timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a 

jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 

214 (2007).

The district court’s orders were entered on the docket 

on October 19, 2012, and February 6, 2013. The notice of appeal 

was filed on November 7, 2013.* Because Falice failed to file a 

timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening 

of the appeal period, we deny his motion to appoint counsel and 

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 

276 (1988). 
3

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

DISMISSED
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-CR.21 **REVISED** **Contact:**  Samantha O’Neil
Public Information Office
(301) 763-3030 (phone)
(301) 763-3762 (fax)
(301) 457-1037 (TDD)PIO@census.gov
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  THURSDAY, FEB. 4, 2010 Media Advisory — 2010 Census Road Tour Comes to Daytona 500 From  local parades and festivals to major sporting events like the Super Bowl and  NCAA Final Four, the Road Tour will attempt to motivate America's growing and  increasingly diverse population to complete and mail back the 10-question  census form when it arrives in mailboxes March 15-17. Traveling for a total of  1,547 days and more than 150,000 miles across the country, 13 road tour  vehicles will provide the public with an educational, engaging and interactive  experience that brings the 2010 Census to life. At each event across the country,  attendees will have the opportunity to learn about the 2010 Census and  understand the benefits a complete count can bring to communities everywhere;  view a sample 2010 Census form and learn how the collected information is used;  and contribute stories and photos to the Portrait of America project to explain  why "I count!" and view messages from other road tour participants.
  Sunday  Thursday event  to feature the 2010 Census No. 16 Ford Fusion
  Midway:  Near Turn 4, outside of track
 For more information about the 2010 Census and the Road Tour, please visit 2010census.gov and follow us on Twitter (@2010Portrait), Facebook, MySpace, Flickr and YouTube (/uscensusbureau).
  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
#### Leroy KING v. STATE.

No. 36823.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 1968.

Rehearing Denied March 19, 1968.

202 Appeal dismissed without opinion. So.2d 837.
#### Walter MILLER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-327.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 12, 1972.

Melvyn Kessler, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.-

Before CHARLES CARROLL, HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Walter Miller, appeals to this court from a non-jury conviction of robbery and a five year sentence. Two questions are raised for our consideration: first, whether the circumstantial evidence presented at trial was sufficient for conviction and second, was the sentence imposed illegal because the trial judge was prejudiced by defendant’s juvenile record.

A person charged with a crime may be convicted solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Lowe v. State, 90 Fla. 225, 105 So. 829 (1925); Navarro v. State, Fla.App.1972, 262 So.2d 729; Trimble v. State, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 738. To be sufficient for conviction the circum*424stantial evidence presented at trial must be consistent with the accused’s guilt, inconsistent with innocence and must exclude every reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt. Terzado v. State, Fla.App.1970, 232 So.2d 232; Rhoden v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 227 So.2d 349; Garcia v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 227 So.2d 209; Forbes v. State, Fla.App.1968, 210 So.2d 246; Williams v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 206 So.2d 446; Spina v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 203 So.2d 20.

In the instant case the complaining witness stated that upon returning home one evening she was rushed by a black man approximately 5 feet 10 inches tall in a white short sleeve shirt who snatched her purse. Another witness stated that he saw a black man in a white T shirt leave the victim’s house and get into a back seat of a car with two other black men. A description of the car and its license number was given to the police who later discovered the car and kept it under surveillance. Another man dressed differently from the suspect got into the automobile, but when the vehicle was stopped the victim’s purse was found on the back seat next to the defendant whose physical description and mode of dress matched the reports given by the witnesses. This evidence adduced at trial in the case sub judice was sufficient for conviction in view of the above requirements; therefore, defendant’s first argument is without merit.

The remaining issue before this court deals with defendant’s allegation of prejudice on the part of the trial judge. Defendant contends that his juvenile record was reviewed by the judge and as a result the judge was prejudiced against defendant and the sentence imposed was unduly punitive and severe. Defendant’s argument is not well taken because a review of the record discloses that the judge did not consider or use the juvenile record when defendant was sentenced.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment and sentence herein appealed are affirmed.

Affirmed.
[J-96-2017]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Appellee

v.

SEIFULLAH ABDUL-SALAAM,

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 737 CAP

Appeal from the Order entered on 3/28/17 

in the Court of Common Pleas, 

Cumberland County, Criminal Division, 

dismissing PCRA relief at No. CP-21-CR0001499-1994

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of December, 2017, the Order of the Court of Common 

Pleas is AFFIRMED. See Commonwealth v. Spotz, 731 CAP, 2017 WL 4655002 (Pa. 

Oct. 18, 2017).
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**Certification of CEO and CFO 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 onForm 10-Q of APAC Customer Services, Inc. (the “Company”) for thefiscal quarter ended April 3, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Robert J. Keller, asChief Executive Officer of the Company, and Marc T. Tanenberg, as ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that tohis knowledge:

 

(1) The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/  Robert J. Keller           |   |
|---------------------------------|--------|
| Name:  Robert J. Keller         |
| Title:  Chief Executive Officer |
| Date:  May 13, 2005             |
|                            |
| /s/  Marc T. Tanenberg          |   |
| Name: Marc T. Tanenberg         |
| Title: Chief Financial Officer  |
| Date: May 13, 2005              |

 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent requiredby the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposesof §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to beincorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before orafter the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in suchfiling.

 

----
#### Clarence KINDLE v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 44621.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 22, 1968.

John H. Shands, Vaiden, for appellant.

Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by Guy N. Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for ap-pellee.

GILLESPIE, Presiding Justice.

Pursuant to Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated section 10224 (1953), the Board of *208Supervisors of Carroll County adopted an ordinance providing that “it shall hereafter he unlawful to sell, swap, barter or give away Beer or Wine at any place outside of incorporated Municipalities in Carroll County, State of Mississippi, between the hours of 11:00 P.M. on any Saturday nights and the following hours of 7:00 A. M. on Monday mornings.” This case originated in the justice of the peace court, was appealed and tried de novo in the circuit court. The affidavit charged that Clarence Kindle did “unlawfully sell, give away, or allow beer to be consumed on his premises” within the hours prohibited by the aforesaid ordinance. He was found guilty and fined $100.

In his appeal to this Court, Kindle raises several questions, one of which is based on the State’s instruction No. 1 which stated that if the jury believed from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant “did sell, give away, *or permit to be consumed on Ms premises,*beer on Sunday outside of a municipality,” etc., then it was the sworn duty of the jury to find a verdict of guilty.

Neither the statute authorizing the adoption of the ordinance nor the ordinance itself made it unlawful to “permit to be consumed on his premises, beer on Sunday.” Therefore, the instruction was fatally defective and the case must be reversed.

Kindle raises the issue whether he should have been granted a peremptory instruction, but after a careful review of the evidence, we are of the opinion that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to make a jury issue.

The other questions raised by the appellant do not justify discussion.

■ Reversed and remanded.

PATTERSON, INZER, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur.
# C_2012368EN.01001601.xml

| 28.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/16

---

Calls for proposals under the multi-annual work programme 2012 for grants in the field of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) for the period 2007-2013

(Commission Decision C(2012) 1574 as amended by Commission Decision C(2012) 8508)

2012/C 368/08

The European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport is hereby launching six calls for proposals, under the multi-annual work programme for the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) for the period 2007-2013, in order to award grants to the following fields:

| — | Priority Projects concerning rail, road and inland waterways (PPs) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 731 million, |
| --- | --- |

—

Priority Projects concerning rail, road and inland waterways (PPs) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 731 million,

| — | European Rail Traffic Management Systems (ERTMS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 100 million, |
| --- | --- |

—

European Rail Traffic Management Systems (ERTMS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 100 million,

| — | River Information Services (RIS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 10 million, |
| --- | --- |

—

River Information Services (RIS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 10 million,

| — | Air Traffic Management (ATM) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 50 million, |
| --- | --- |

—

Air Traffic Management (ATM) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 50 million,

| — | Motorways of the Sea (MoS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 80 million, |
| --- | --- |

—

Motorways of the Sea (MoS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 80 million,

| — | Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) including the European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 50 million. |
| --- | --- |

—

Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) including the European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) — the indicative amount available for the selected proposals is EUR 50 million.

The deadline for the submission of proposals is 28 February 2013.

28 February 2013

The complete texts of the calls for proposals are available on:

http://tentea.ec.europa.eu/en/apply_for_funding/follow_the_funding_process/calls_for_proposals_2012.htm

---