alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Thomas William BRYAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-143.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 8, 1973.

Rehearing Denied July 19, 1973.

*333Seymour L. Honig, Tampa, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

HOBSON, Judge.

Appellant Thomas William Bryan and a co-defendant, Jimmy Stephens, were jointly charged in an information with robbery. They were tried together, convicted by a jury, adjudged guilty and sentenced to the State penitentiary.

One of the points raised on this appeal relates to the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses to the crime of robbery. This point was also raised by Jimmy Stephens in his appeal to this court, 279 So.2d 331. We held in the *Stephens*case that the lower court was correct in refusing to instruct the jury on the offenses of buying, receiving, or aiding in the concealment of stolen property; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; assault and battery; and conspiracy to commit robbery. After examining the information and the evidence, we determined that an instruction should have been given as to the offense of simple assault. We held, however, that in view of the substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict, the error in failing to give the instruction was harmless. Stephens, *supra;*State v. Wilson, Fla.1973, 276 So.2d 45; DeLaine v. State, Fla.1972, 262 So.2d 655; F.S., § 924.33 F.S.A. See also Henry v. State, this court’s case No. 72-797, 277 So.2d 78, opinion filed May 4, 1973.

We have carefully reviewed the other points posed by appellant and find them to be without merit.

The judgment appealed is, therefore,

Affirmed.

LILES, A. C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.
# C_2014027EN.01000101.xml

| 30.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6962 — Renova Industries/Schmolz & Bickenbach)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 27/01)

On 19 December 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6962. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6962. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3401

To amend section 105(a)(8) of the Housing and Community Development

Act of 1974 to increase the percentage limitation on the amount of

community development block grant assistance that may be expended

for public services activities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 28, 1993

Mr. COYNE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs

A BILL

To amend section 105(a)(8) of the Housing and Community

Development Act of 1974 to increase the percentage

limitation on the amount of community development

block grant assistance that may be expended for public

services activities.

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

3 SECTION 1. PUBLIC SERVICES CAP.

4 Section 105(a)(8) of the Housing and Community

5 Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5305(a)(8)) is

6 amended—
2

•HR 3401 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘15 per centum’’ each place it

2 appears and inserting ‘‘20 percent’’; and

3 (2) by striking ‘‘15 percent’’ and inserting ‘‘20

4 percent’’.

5 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

6 The amendments made by section 1 shall apply with

7 respect to grant amounts made available under title I of

8 the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974

9 in fiscal year 1994 and fiscal years thereafter.

Æ
# C_2015350EN.01000401.xml

| 22.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 350/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 350/4

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2015/C 350/06)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 19.9.2015 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 19.9-31.12.2015 |
| Member State | Belgium |
| Stock or Group of stocks | ANF/8ABDE. |
| Species | Anglerfish (Lophiidae) |
| Zone | VIIIa, VIIIb, VIIId and VIIIe |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 49/TQ104 |

Date and time of closure

19.9.2015

Duration

19.9-31.12.2015

Member State

Belgium

Stock or Group of stocks

ANF/8ABDE.

Species

Anglerfish (Lophiidae)

Lophiidae

Zone

VIIIa, VIIIb, VIIId and VIIIe

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

49/TQ104

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
# C_2015098EN.01001001.xml

| 25.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 98/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 98/10

---

Commission notice pursuant to Article 17(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Invitation to tender in respect of the operation of scheduled air services in accordance with public service obligations

(2015/C 98/10)

| Member State | France |
| --- | --- |
| Routes concerned | Bastia – Paris (Orly)
  Bastia – Marseille
  Bastia – Nice
  Calvi – Paris (Orly)
  Calvi – Marseille
  Calvi – Nice |
| Period of validity of the contract | from 25 March 2016 to 24 March 2020 |
| Deadline for the submission of applications and tenders | for applications and tenders:
  1 June 2015 (16:00, local time) |
| Address from which the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained | The Director |
| Office des Transports de la Corse |
| 19 avenue Georges-Pompidou |
| Quartier Saint-Joseph |
| BP 501 |
| 20189 Ajaccio Cedex 2 |
| FRANCE |
| Tel. +33 495237130 |
| Fax +33 495201631 |
| E-mail: francis.pian@otc-corse.fr |

Member State

France

Routes concerned

Bastia – Paris (Orly)

Bastia – Marseille

Bastia – Nice

Calvi – Paris (Orly)

Calvi – Marseille

Calvi – Nice

Period of validity of the contract

from 25 March 2016 to 24 March 2020

Deadline for the submission of applications and tenders

for applications and tenders:

1 June 2015 (16:00, local time)

Address from which the text of the invitation to tender and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public tender and the public service obligation can be obtained

The Director

Office des Transports de la Corse

19 avenue Georges-Pompidou

Quartier Saint-Joseph

BP 501

20189 Ajaccio Cedex 2

FRANCE

Tel. +33 495237130

Fax +33 495201631

E-mail: francis.pian@otc-corse.fr

---
# C_2015182EN.01000301.xml

| 3.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/3

---

Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))

1

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 182/03)

Decisions granting an authorisation

Decisions granting an authorisation

| Reference of the decision (2) | Date of decision | Substance name | Holder of the authorisation | Authorisation number | Authorised use | Date of expiry of review period | Reasons for the decision |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C(2015) 3524 | 29 May 2015 | Diarsenic trioxide
  EC No 215-481-4
  CAS No 1327-53-3 | Yara France, Immeuble Opus 12, 77 Esplanade du Général de Gaulle CS 90047, 92914 Paris La Défense Cedex, FRANCE | REACH/15/1/0 | The industrial use of diarsenic trioxide as a processing aid to activate the absorption and desorption of carbon dioxide by potassium carbonate from synthesis gas formed in the production of ammonia | 21 March 2017 | — | In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health or the environment arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies in terms of their technical and economic feasibility for the applicant, while transition to an alternative is envisaged within 22 months. |

Reference of the decision (2)

2

Date of decision

Substance name

Holder of the authorisation

Authorisation number

Authorised use

Date of expiry of review period

Reasons for the decision

C(2015) 3524

29 May 2015

Diarsenic trioxide

EC No 215-481-4

CAS No 1327-53-3

Yara France, Immeuble Opus 12, 77 Esplanade du Général de Gaulle CS 90047, 92914 Paris La Défense Cedex, FRANCE

REACH/15/1/0

The industrial use of diarsenic trioxide as a processing aid to activate the absorption and desorption of carbon dioxide by potassium carbonate from synthesis gas formed in the production of ammonia

21 March 2017

—

In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health or the environment arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies in terms of their technical and economic feasibility for the applicant, while transition to an alternative is envisaged within 22 months.

---

(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

1

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm

2

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,311
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,161
<ALLOWANCES>                                       395
<INVENTORY>                                      9,058
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                29,776
<PP&E>                                          47,290
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,916
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  55,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,261
<BONDS>                                            394
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,167
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,142
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    55,592
<SALES>                                         96,825
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                96,825
<CGS>                                           74,100
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   74,100
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 920
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    406
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (9)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                415
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       415
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .26
        

</TABLE>
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 CFR part 225) to engage                     *de novo,*                     or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.                

Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the notice must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than September 4, 2018.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis*                     (Mark A. Rauzi, Vice President), 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291:                

                    1.                     *N.A. Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota;*                     to engage in data processing activities through its subsidiary, ExCheQ, LLC, Roseville, Minnesota, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(14)(i) of Regulation Y.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 14, 2018.

Ann Misback,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2018-17834 Filed 8-17-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE P
# C_2014039EN.01000101.xml

| 8.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/1

---

2014/C 39/01

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 31, 1.2.2014

OJ C 31, 1.2.2014

Past publications

Past publications

OJ C 24, 25.1.2014

OJ C 15, 18.1.2014

OJ C 9, 11.1.2014

OJ C 377, 21.12.2013

OJ C 367, 14.12.2013

OJ C 359, 7.12.2013

These texts are available on:

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

---
#### Charlie HAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. KK-98.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 3, 1978.

Charlie Hayes, in pro. per., for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a summary denial of a motion to vacate or set aside a judgment and sentence. (Rule 3.850, Fla.R.Crim.P.) Appellant was convicted of robbery with a firearm. He contends that his sentence to life imprisonment is illegal because the statute (sections 812.13(2)(a) and 775.082(b), Florida Statutes (1977)), provides that the sentence be “a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment” and that such terminology does not permit a life sentence. We disagree. We interpret this statute to al*1017low the sentence to be either a term of years or life imprisonment.

AFFIRMED.

McCORD, C. J., and MILLS and BOYER, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Berry Only Inc. (the
"Company") for the period ended September 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Lisa Guise, as Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 results of operations
          of the Company.


Date: December 13, 2012                By: /s/ Lisa Guise
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Lisa Guise, President,
                                           Chief Executive Officer and
                                           Chief Financial Officer Director

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3212 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3212

 To require the withdrawal of United States Armed Forces from Somalia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 5, 1993

  Mr. Hefley introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the withdrawal of United States Armed Forces from Somalia.

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

SECTION 1. WITHDRAWAL OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES FROM SOMALIA.

    (a) Limitation.--Funds appropriated or otherwise made available to 
the Department of Defense may not be obligated or expended for 
activities, after the effective date of this section, of United States 
Armed Forces participating in or operating in support of the United 
Nations-led force in Somalia (commonly referred to as ``UNOSOM II'') 
authorized by paragraph 5 of the United Nations Security Council 
Resolution 814 (1993).
    (b) Effective Date.--This section takes effect 30 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
#### SUPER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. v. NEW ORLEANS LEVEE BOARD et al.

No. 54301.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 1, 1974.

In re: Fremin-Smith Services, Inc. and American Employers Insurance Company applying for Certiorari, or Writ of Review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. 286 So.2d 134.

Writ denied. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, the result is correct.
#### Mack Daniel HOWLETT, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director of the Florida Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 42500.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 22, 1972.

Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Public Defender, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Nelson E. Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The Court having issued Rule to Show Cause and having considered the return of *678the respondent to said Rule, it is ordered that the petition for writ of habeas corpus is hereby denied.

ROBERTS, C. J., and CARLTON, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J., dissents with opinion.

ERVIN, Justice

(dissenting):

It appears admitted in the State’s return to our rule to show in habeas corpus that Petitioner Howlett, an indigent with court-appointed counsel, did not avail himself of the opportunity to petition this Court for a writ of certiorari review of his case because he was not given due and timely notice of the Fourth District Court’s final affirmance of his conviction and sentence of five years for larceny. His counsel only learned that Petitioner’s petition for rehearing of the District Court’s original decision to affirm the conviction was denied by reading of the District Court’s ruling in the Southern Reporter advance sheets after the time provided by the rules for filing a petition for writ of certiorari to review the District ¿burt’s decision in this Court had expired.

The State contends that the Petitioner has no fundamental right to petition for a writ of certiorari review by this Court of the District Court’s affirmance of the conviction; that only a direct, appeal is constitutionally guaranteed. See Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So.2d 239. The State points out that the granting of a cer-tiorari review by this Court is merely a matter of discretion.

Even though this argument may be technically correct, it begs the question and skirts the issue of affording equal justice under the exceptional and particular facts of this case.

We should exercise our habeas corpus jurisdiction discretion and allow the Petitioner the opportunity within a short period to *file*with us his petition for writ of certio-rari and then determine therefrom if it has merit entitling him to a certiorari review. If it has no merit, it can be summarily denied, as are hundreds of other petitions which were timely filed.

It does not appear to me that merely because there is no fundamental right to file a petition for certiorari is a good reason for our refusing to exercise our discretion to allow the equivalent of the late filing through habeas corpus, where the reason for failure to file on time was due to lack of official notice of the District Court’s ruling.