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

San Antonio, Texas

May 28, 2019

No. 04-19-00247-CV

Sonja CAMPBELL,

Appellant

v.

David CAMPBELL,

Appellee

From the County Court At Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019CV00288

Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Appellant Sonja Campbell filed a notice of appeal on April 22, 2019. The Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure require the notice of appeal to state the date of the judgment or order 

appealed from. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.1(d)(2). Appellant’s notice of appeal refers to a writ of 

possession signed on April 11, 2019. The clerk’s record shows the April 22, 2019 writ of 

possession was set aside. The clerk’s record also contains a new judgment signed on May 9, 

2019. It is therefore ORDERED that appellant clarify within ten days from the date of this order 

whether she seeks to appeal the May 9, 2019 judgment. See TEX. R. APP. P. 27.1(a) (“In a civil 

case, a prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed on the day of, but after, 

the event that begins the period for perfecting the appeal.”).

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

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

court on this 28th day of May, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
# C_2018086EN.01017201.xml

| 6.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 86/172 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 86/172

---

P8_TA(2016)0261

EU-Philippines Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation (accession of Croatia) ***

European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 June 2016 on the draft Council decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Union and its Member States, of the Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (13085/2014 — C8-0009/2015 — 2014/0224(NLE))

(Consent)

(2018/C 086/37)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

| — | having regard to the draft Council decision (13085/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Council decision (13085/2014),

| — | having regard to the draft Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (13082/2014), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the draft Protocol to the Framework Agreement on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of the Philippines, of the other part, to take account of the accession of the Republic of Croatia to the European Union (13082/2014),

| — | having regard to request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 207 and 209 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0009/2015), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to request for consent submitted by the Council in accordance with Articles 207 and 209 and Article 218(6), second subparagraph, point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (C8-0009/2015),

| — | having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2), and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 99(1), first and third subparagraphs, Rule 99(2), and Rule 108(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0148/2016), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A8-0148/2016),

| 1. | Gives its consent to conclusion of the protocol; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Gives its consent to conclusion of the protocol;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of the Philippines. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and of the Republic of the Philippines.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TYRON HANDY,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 392 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of January, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 41142

STATE OF IDAHO ,
Plaintiff-Respondent ,

v.

BRIAN JOSEPH STANDLEE ,
Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 346

Filed: February 4, 2014

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Thir d Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon County. Hon. Molly J. Huskey , District Judge.

Order denying I.C.R. 35 motion for reduction of sentence, affirmed

.
Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Shawn F. Wilkerson, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respon dent.

________________________________________________ Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM
Brian Joseph Standlee pled guilty to felony injury to a child . I.C. § 18

- 1501(1) . The

district court sentenced Standlee to a unified term of seven years, with a m inimum period of
confinement of two years , and retained jurisdiction. Following successful completion of the
retained jurisdiction, the district court suspended the sentence and placed Standlee on probation.
Standlee twice violated the terms of the probation, and the district court revoked probation,
ordered execution of Standlee’s sentence, an d again retained jurisdiction. Following Standlee’s
second period of retained jurisdiction, the district court entered an order relinquishing
jurisdiction. Standlee filed an untimely I.C.R 35 motion, which the district court denied.

Standlee appeals.2 Idaho Criminal Rule 35 provides that a district court has discretion to consider and act

upon a mo tion filed within 120 days of the order relinquishing jurisdiction. The filing limitations
provided by Rule 35 are a jurisdictional limit on the authority of the court to consider the motion

and

, unless filed within the period, a district court lacks juri sdiction to grant any relief

. State v.

Sutton , 113 Idaho 832, 833, 748 P.2d 416, 417 (Ct. App. 1987). In this case, Standlee
acknowledges that his Rule 35 motion for reduction of sentence was untimely. Because

Standlee’s Rule 35 motion was not filed within the 120

- day limitation provided by the rule, the
district court lacked jurisdiction to consider it. Accordingly, we do not address the merits of

Richards’s Rule 35 motion. Therefore, the district court’s order denying Standlee ’s Rule 35

motion is affirmed.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 18

- 00091

- CV

Javier M. Alarcia , Appellant

v.

Julie Gianelloni Connor, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COUR T AT LAW NO. 1 OF TR AVIS COUNTY NO. C

- 1

- CV

- 14

- 007875 , THE HONORABLE TODD T. WONG, JUDGE PRE SIDING

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

Appellant Javier M. Alarcia has filed an unopposed moti on to dismiss this appeal.

We g rant appellant’s motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)

.

__________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Justice

Before Chief Justice Rose, Justices Pemberton and Field

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: July 6, 2018
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

May 28, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00247

- CV

Sonja CAMPBELL

, Appellant

v.

David CAMPBELL

, Appellee

From the County Court At Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas Trial Cou rt No. 2019CV00288 Honorable David J. Rodriguez, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant Sonja Campbell filed a notice of appeal on April 22, 2019. The Texas Rules of A ppellate Procedure require the notice of appeal to state the date of the judgment or order appealed from. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 25.1(d)(2). Appellant’s notice of appeal refers to a writ of possession signed on April 11, 2019. The clerk’s record shows the April 22, 2019 writ of possession was set aside. The clerk’s record also contains a new judgment signed on May 9, 2019. It is therefore ORDERED that appellant clarify within ten days from the date of this order whether she seeks to appeal the May 9, 2019 judgment

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 27.1(a) (“In a civil case, a prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed o n the day of, but after, the event that begins the period for perfecting the appeal.”).

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITN ESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 28th day of May, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
# C_2014084EN.01000301.xml

| 22.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 84/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/3

---

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/151/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 284/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine

2014/C 84/03

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP (1), as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/151/CFSP (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 284/2014 (4) concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.

1

2

3

4

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014 concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine. The grounds for designations of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the web sites in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 269/2014, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council's decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 16.

1

(2)  OJ L 86, 21.3.2014, p. 30.

2

(3)  OJ L 78, 17.3.2014, p. 6.

3

(4)  OJ L 86, 21.3.2014, p. 27.

4

---
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

KENDALL ROWE
, Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT and

MYESHA MULLI G AN
, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 19

- 2020

[ April 9, 2020 ]

Appeal from the State of Florida, Department of Revenue, Child Support Enforcement, L.T. Case No s

. CSE #2001404864 and DEP.

#50190700367CA

.

Kendall Rowe, Greenac re s, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Child Support Enforcement, Tallahassee, for appellee Department of Revenue

.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, M AY and G ERBER
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# C_2015367EN.01001104.xml

| 5.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 367/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 367/11

---

TRANSLATION CENTRE FOR THE BODIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

Publication of the final accounts for the financial year 2014

(2015/C 367/43)

The complete version of the final accounts may be found at the following address:

http://cdt.europa.eu/EN/documentation/Pages/Revenue-and-expenditure-account-and-balance-sheet.aspx

---
#### The BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF POLK COUNTY, Florida, etc. and the Home Insurance Company, etc., Petitioners, v. Emmett F. VARNADOE et al., Respondents.

No. 42485.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 20, 1972.

Certiorari denied.

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

ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., dissent.
#### Edward Lee FLETCHER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-531.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Feb. 16, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
H. R. 3617

One Hundred Third Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-four

An Act

To amend the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989,

and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section

104 of the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion

Act of 1989 (16 U.S.C. 410r–8) is hereby amended by adding at

the end thereof the following new subsection:

‘‘(k)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the

Secretary is authorized to use funds appropriated pursuant to this

Act, including any available funds appropriated to the National

Park Service for construction in the Department of the Interior

and Related Agencies Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 1991

through 1994 for project modifications by the Army Corps of Engineers, in such amounts as determined by the Secretary, to provide

Federal assistance to the State of Florida (including political subdivisions of the State) for acquisition of lands described in paragraph (4).

‘‘(2) With respect to any lands acquired pursuant to this subsection, the Secretary may provide not more than 25 percent of

the total cost of such acquisition.

‘‘(3) All funds made available pursuant to this subsection shall

be transferred to the State of Florida or a political subdivision

of the State, subject to an agreement that any lands acquired

with such funds will be managed in perpetuity for the restoration

of natural flows to the park or Florida Bay.
H. R. 3617—2

‘‘(4) The lands referred to in paragraph (1) are those lands

or interests therein adjacent to, or affecting the restoration of

natural water flows to, the park or Florida Bay which are located

east of the park and known as the Frog Pond, Rocky Glades Agricultural Area, and the Eight-and-One-Half Square-Mile Area.’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM LYNTON
GROUP, INC.'S AUDITED ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30
, 1995 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              Sep-30-1994
<PERIOD-START>                 Oct-01-1994
<PERIOD-END>                   Sep-30-1995
<CASH>                             137,322
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                    1,970,177
<ALLOWANCES>                        21,809
<INVENTORY>                      1,019,810
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 3,561,077
<PP&E>                          17,280,678
<DEPRECIATION>                   3,453,387
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  23,922,940
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            6,308,845
<BONDS>                         17,410,848
<COMMON>                           587,153
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                             30
<OTHER-SE>                       (383,939)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    23,922,940
<SALES>                         33,638,321
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                33,638,321
<CGS>                           27,694,813
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   27,694,813
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               1,808,028
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (2,320,153)
<INCOME-TAX>                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (2,320,153)
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                   (2,320,153)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (1.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (1.30)
        

</TABLE>
#### Victor RIVERA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 67-176.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third Distinct.

Feb. 6, 1968.

Robert L. Koeppel, Public Defender and Marvin J. Emory, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and Harold Mendelow, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was convicted of lewd, lascivious and indecent acts in the presence of, and assault upon, a male minor under the age of 14 years. He has appealed the judgment of guilty and sentence to three years in the State prison.

The only substantial question presented on this appeal is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to prove that the crime charged in the information was committed within two years of the filing of the information. We have carefully reviewed the record and find that a fair reading thereof demonstrates that the crime was committed on the same day that the appellant was arrested. The record, therefore, reveals that the crime was committed within the two year period. The judgment and sentence are affirmed upon authority of the rule stated in Ball v. State, Fla.App.1967, 204 So.2d 523.

Affirmed.
#### Mary Esther FOWLER, Petitioner, v. John Harold CLARK, Respondent.

No. 44735.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 5, 1974.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3815 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3815

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to convey a vessel in the 
      National Defense Reserve Fleet to a nonprofit organization.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 8, 1994

 Mr. Gilchrest (for himself and Mrs. Bentley) introduced the following 
   bill; which was referred to the Committee on Merchant Marine and 
                               Fisheries

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to convey a vessel in the 
      National Defense Reserve Fleet to a nonprofit organization.

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

SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF VESSEL FOR PUBLIC HEALTH ACTIVITIES.

    (a) Authority to Convey.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
convey without consideration all right, title, and interest of the 
United States in a vessel described in subsection (b) to any nonprofit 
organization which operates and maintains a former hospital ship to be 
converted to engage in public health activities.
    (b) Vessel Described.--A vessel referred to in subsection (a) is 
one which--
            (1) is in the National Defense Reserve Fleet on the date of 
        the enactment of this Act;
            (2) is not less than 4,000 displacement tons;
            (3) has no usefulness to the Government; and
            (4) is scheduled to be scrapped.
    (c) Conditions of Conveyance.--As a condition of conveying any 
vessel to an organization under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
require that before the date of the conveyance the organization enter 
into an agreement under which the organization shall--
            (1) sell the vessel for scrap purposes; and
            (2) use the proceeds of that scrapping for the purpose of 
        refurbishing and maintaining a former hospital ship to engage 
        in public health activities.
    (d) Delivery of Vessel.--The Secretary shall deliver any vessel 
conveyed under this section--
            (1) at the place where the vessel is located on the date of 
        the approval of the conveyance by the Secretary;
            (2) in its condition on that date; and
            (3) without cost to the Government.
    (e) Expiration of Authority to Convey.--The authority of the 
Secretary under this section to convey a vessel shall expire on the 
date that is 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
#### The State of Ohio, Appellee, *v.*Rector, Appellant.

(No. 30568

Decided January 23, 1946.)

*Mr. Frank T. Cullitan,*prosecuting attorney, *Mr. Norman S. Minor*and *Miss Gertrude M. Bauer,*for appellee.

*Mr. Louis Fernberg*and *Mr. Myron S. Stanford,*for appellant.

It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved. .

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Bell, Williams, Turner, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.