alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 250

Honoring the United States Capitol Police for their commitment to security

at the Capitol.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 16, 2001

Ms. LEE submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on House Administration

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Honoring the United States Capitol Police for their

commitment to security at the Capitol.

Whereas the Capitol is an important symbol of freedom and

democracy across the United States and throughout the

world, and those who safeguard the Capitol safeguard

that freedom and democracy;

Whereas millions of people visit the Capitol each year to observe and learn the workings of the democratic process;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police force was created

by Congress in 1828 to provide security for the Capitol;

Whereas today the United States Capitol Police provide protection and support services throughout an array of congressional buildings, parks, and thoroughfares;
2

•HCON 250 IH

Whereas the United States Capitol Police provide security for

Members of Congress, their staffs, other government employees, and many others who live near, work on, and

visit Capitol Hill;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police have successfully

managed and coordinated major demonstrations, joint

sessions of Congress, State of the Union Addresses, State

funerals, and inaugurations;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police have bravely faced

numerous emergencies, including three bombings and two

shootings, one of which, in 1998, tragically took the lives

of Private First Class Jacob ‘‘J.J.’’ Chestnut and Detective John Michael Gibson;

Whereas the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have

created a uniquely difficult environment for the United

States Capitol Police, requiring heightened security,

prompting extra alertness, and causing some strain

among police, staff, and visitors;

Whereas the United States Capitol Police responded to this

challenge quickly and courageously, including by facilitating the evacuation of all of the buildings under their

purview, as well as the perimeter thereof; and

Whereas the United States Capitol Police have instituted 12-

hour shifts, 6 days per week, requiring that officers work

30 hours of overtime each week to ensure the continued

protection of the Capitol: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the Congress honors and thanks the

3 United States Capitol Police for their outstanding work
3

•HCON 250 IH

1 and dedication during a period of heightened security that

2 began on September 11, 2001.

Æ
#### STATE of Utah, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. John Fairfield VAN GERVAN, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 18593.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Jan. 28, 1983.

*1378Loni F. DeLand, Salt Lake City, for defendant and appellant.

David L. Wilkinson, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff and respondent.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant appeals his conviction of driving under the influence of alcohol.

Defendant was first tried and convicted by a jury in the justice of the peace court. He appealed to the district court where a trial de novo was conducted and evidence was taken. The district court also found defendant guilty, ruling that he had voluntarily submitted to field sobriety tests. Now, before this Court, defendant seeks reversal based on alleged insufficiency of the evidence. Specifically, defendant contends that there was no evidence that he voluntarily submitted to the field sobriety tests and that evidence that he refused to take a chemical test was erroneously admitted.

Article VIII, Section 9 of the Constitution of Utah provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

> Appeals shall also lie from the final judgment of justices of the peace in civil and criminal cases to the District Courts on both questions of law and fact, with such limitations and restrictions as shall be provided by law; and the decision of the District Courts on such appeals shall be final, except in cases involving the validity or constitutionality of a statute.

In *State v. Munger,*Utah, 642 P.2d 721 (1982), we quoted the foregoing language and then stated as follows:

> While the language of Section 78-3-5, U.C.A., (1953) appears somewhat broader in referring to an exception for “cases involving a constitutional issue,” the more narrowly drawn restrictions of Article VIII, Section 9 are controlling.

Because defendant does not challenge the validity or constitutionality *of a statute,*the district court’s decision is final. The purported appeal to this Court is therefore dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 295 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con.Res.295
                                     Agreed to December 20, 2001        

                      One Hundred Seventh Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
             the third day of January, two thousand and one

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Thursday, 
December 20, 2001, or Friday, December 21, 2001, on a motion offered 
pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his 
designee, it stand adjourned sine die, or until Members are notified to 
reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first; and that when the Senate adjourns at the close 
of business on Thursday, December 20, 2001, or Friday, December 21, 
2001, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its 
Majority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned sine die, or until 
Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this 
concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and the Senate, respectively, to reassemble at 
such place and time as they may designate whenever, in their opinion, 
the public interest shall warrant it.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 12

- 00230

- CR

WILLIAM CHARLES WEBB , Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

From the 54th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012

- 675

- C2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant filed what appeared to be a pro se interlocutory notice of appeal of the trial court’s ruling on his motion for bond reduction. A week later he filed a similar notice of appeal in this case.Webb v. State Page 2

The Clerk of the Court notified Appellant that this case was subject to dismissal for want of jurisdiction and that the Court might dismiss his appeal unless he show ed grounds for continuing it. Appellant did not respond to the Clerk’s letter. 1 This Court lacks jurisdiction over a trial court‘s denial of a motion for bond reduction when the appeal is not from the trial court’s denial of a pretrial application

for wri t of habeas corpus in which the appellant sought bond reduction. See Benford v.

State , 994 S.W.2d 404, 409 (Tex. App.

— Waco 1999, no pet.); see also Sanchez v. State , 340 S.W.3d 848, 849 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2011, no pet.). Accordingly, this appeal is

d ismissed for want of jurisdiction. 2

REX D. DAVIS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed August 30, 2012 Do n ot p ublish [C R25]

1 Appellant filed an application for writ of habeas corpus in this appeal. We dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction because court s of appeals do not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal law matters

. See Ex parte Price , 228 S.W.3d 885, 886 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2007, orig. proceeding) ; Ex parte Hearon , 3 S.W.3d 650 (Tex. App.

— Waco 1999, orig. proceeding ).

2 We dismiss as moot Appellant’s pending motion for speedy trial and motion to withdraw attorney of record.
Exhibit 32.2  Section 1350 Certification  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Yan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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 result of operations of the Company.   May 13, 2011/s/ Yan ZengYan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer, principal financial officer   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 10.8    
    


COLD SPRING CAPITAL INC.  


                        ,
2005 


Full
Circle LLC

430 Main Street

Williamstown, Massachusetts 01267 


Gentlemen:



        This
letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective date ("Effective Date") of the registration statement for the
initial public offering ("IPO") of the securities of Cold Spring Capital Inc. ("Company") and
continuing until the consummation by the Company of an initial transaction (as described in the Company's IPO prospectus), Full Circle LLC or its affiliates shall make available to the Company certain
limited administrative, technology and secretarial services, as well as the use of certain limited office space, as may be required by the Company from time to time, situated at 51 Locust Avenue,
Suite 302, New Canaan Connecticut 06840 (or any successor location). In exchange therefor, the Company shall pay Full Circle LLC the sum of $7,500 per month on the Effective Date and continuing
monthly thereafter until consummation of an initial transaction. 



	 	 	Very truly yours,
	

 	
 	
COLD SPRING CAPITAL INC.
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

 
	 	 	 	 	
 Name:

Title:
	

 	
 	

AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:
	

 	
 	
FULL CIRCLE LLC
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

 
	 	 	 	 	
 Name:

Title:













QuickLinks



Exhibit 10.8
FILED IN6th COURT OF APPEALS    TEXARKANA, TEXAS2/19/2015 2:53:31 PM      DEBBIE AUTREY              Clerk
III

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 46

Relating to the retirement of William D. Lackey.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 12, 1999

Mr. LOTT (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following resolution;

which was considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Relating to the retirement of William D. Lackey.

Whereas William D. Lackey has faithfully served the United

States Senate as an employee of the Senate since September 4, 1964, and since that date has ably and faithfully upheld the highest standards and traditions of the

staff of the United States Senate;

Whereas during his 35 years, in positions of responsibility in

offices in the United States Senate, William D. Lackey

has at all times discharged the duties and responsibilities

of his office with extraordinary efficiency, aplomb, and

devotion; and

Whereas William D. Lackey has faithfully served the United

States Senate with honor and distinction in the Office of

the Journal Clerk since October 1, 1978, and his hard
2

SRES 46 ATS

work and outstanding performance resulted in his appointment as Journal Clerk: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the United States Senate commends

2 William D. Lackey for his service to his country and the

3 United States Senate, and wishes to express its deep ap4 preciation and gratitude for his long and faithfull service.

5 SEC. 2. That the Secretary of the Senate shall trans6 mit a copy of this resolution to William D. Lackey.

Æ
<PAGE>

                         Vyteris Holdings (Nevada), Inc.
                               13-01 Pollitt Drive
                           Fairlawn, New Jersey 07410


                                 August 2, 2005

Spencer Trask Specialty Group, LLC
535 Madison Avenue
New York, New York 10022

Dear Sirs:

        As you know, Vyteris Holdings (Nevada), Inc. (the "Company") has been
offered a term sheet by Satellite Asset Management, LP, dated July 28, 2005 (the
"Term Sheet'), pursuant to which the Company expects to offer $10,000,000 of
convertible debentures and warrants. The Term Sheet contemplates, among other
things, that as a condition of the transactions described therein, Spencer Trask
Specialty Group, an affiliate of Spencer Trask Ventures, will be required to
guarantee the principal and interest payments on such debentures if the Company
does not consummate a so-called "qualified equity offering". A qualified equity
offering is defined as one or more offerings of equity securities that raise
total gross proceeds of $15,000,000 or more within a specified six month period.

        The Company has concluded that it is in its best interests to proceed
with the transactions contemplated by the Term Sheet as soon as possible.
Spencer Trask Specialty Group, in turn, has conditioned its willingness to
provide the above-mentioned guarantees on the Company's willingness to provide
the assurance described herein. To induce Spencer Trask Specialty Group to
provide the guarantee contemplated by the Term Sheet, the Company hereby agrees
to use reasonable commercial efforts to effect a "qualified equity offering" (as
defined in the Term Sheet) within the six month period specified in the Term
Sheet.

        This letter supercedes the prior letter.

                                             Very truly yours,

                                             VYTERIS HOLDINGS (NEVADA), INC.

                                             By: /s/ Michael McGuinness
                                                --------------------------------
                                             Name: Michael McGuinness
                                             Title: Chief Financial Officer
[No. 34553-2-I.

Division One.

June 10, 1996.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Lashone Lee Bell, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment *of the*Superior Court for King County, No. 93-1-06372-1, Ricardo S. Martinez, J., entered May 3, 1994. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Coleman, J., concurred in by Baker, C.J., and Agid, J.
Exhibit 32.2  Section 1350 Certification  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lotus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Yan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, 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 result of operations of the Company.  November 10, 2010/s/ Yan ZengYan Zeng, Chief Financial Officer,
principal financial and accounting officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
#### Charles PRIESTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4-86-2943.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 14, 1987.

Richard L. Jorandby, Public Defender, and Marcy Allen, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Jr., Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

DOWNEY, Judge.

Appellant was placed on probation for burglary of a structure, a third degree felony. Thereafter, he was found guilty of violating his probation and the state filed notice of intent to request a sentence as an habitual felony offender. The trial court sentenced appellant as an habitual felony offender to a term of ten years, a sentence which exceeded the statutory maximum for the underlying crime, but which was within the recommended guidelines sentence.

Appellant contends on appeal that the Supreme Court of Florida, in *Whitehead v. State,*498 So.2d 863 (Fla.1986), “repealed” the habitual felony offender statute and that it can no longer co-exist in this era of guideline sentencing.

We hold, as we did in *King v. State,*511 So.2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), that the habitual felony offender statute remains viable in order to impose a sentence greater than the maximum provided by statute for the particular crime involved as long as it does not exceed the maximum range of the recommended guidelines sentence. This same conclusion has been reached in the following cases from the first and second district courts of appeal: *Smith v. Wainwright,*508 So.2d 768 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); *Washington v. State,*508 So.2d 565 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); *Hoefert v. State,*509 So.2d 1090 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); *Winters v. State,*500 So.2d 303 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); *Myers v. State,*499 So.2d 895 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), wherein the respective courts certified to the Supreme Court of Florida the following question as one of great public importance:

> IS THE HABITUAL OFFENDER STATUTE STILL AN EFFECTIVE BASIS ON WHICH TO EXCEED THE STATUTORY MAXIMUM AS LONG AS THE SENTENCE IMPOSED DOES NOT EX*797CEED THE GUIDELINES. RECOMMENDATION?

As in *King,*we join those courts in certifying said question as one of great public importance.

Having considered all of appellant’s other contentions, we affirm the judgment and sentence appealed from.

HERSEY, C.J., and WALDEN, J., concur.
Exhibit
31.4
 CERTIFICATIONS
  I, T. Don
Waddell, certify that:
  1.           I
have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to quarterly report on Form 10-Q of American
Patriot Financial Group, Inc.
  2.           Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;
  Date:  October
      16, 2009
                Signature:
                /s/ T. Don WaddellT.
      Don WaddellChief
      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 Quarterly Report of PSB Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert J. Halloran, Jr., President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that to the best of my
knowledge:



| | 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 as of the dates and for the
periods covered by the report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 11, 2007



/s/ Robert J. Halloran, Jr.Robert J. Halloran, Jr.President and Treasurer




29
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 257

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the men and women of the

United States Postal Service have done an outstanding job of delivering

the mail during this time of national emergency.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 31, 2001

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois (for himself, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr.

RUSH, Mr. GEPHARDT, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. BROWN of Ohio,

Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, Mr. CUMMINGS,

Mr. CRAMER, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr.

OWENS, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. SHIMKUS, Ms. NORTON, Ms. WATSON of California, Mr. HOEFFEL, Ms. CARSON of Indian, Mr. SABO, and Mr.

SERRANO) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the men and

women of the United States Postal Service have done

an outstanding job of delivering the mail during this

time of national emergency.

Whereas, on September 11, 2001, evil acts of terrorism were

perpetrated against the people of the United States and

all humanity;

Whereas, in October 2001, reports of anthrax-tainted letters

began to surface;
2

•HCON 257 IH

Whereas the United States Postal Service handles approximately 680,000,000 pieces of mail each day;

Whereas our Nation’s postal and delivery sector accounts for

approximately 8 percent of our gross national product;

Whereas, since September 11, 2001, the United States Postal

Service has delivered more than 20,000,000,000 pieces of

mail;

Whereas 2 employees of the United States Postal Service

have died as a result of anthrax infection;

Whereas a number of employees of the United States Postal

Service are being treated for anthrax-like symptoms;

Whereas the more than 800,000 men and women who work

for the United States Postal Service have done an outstanding job of delivering the mail during this time of national emergency; and

Whereas the delivery of anthrax through the mail is an attempt to disrupt our ability to communicate through the

mail, and threatens the viability of the postal system:

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That—

3 (1) it is the sense of the Congress that the men

4 and women of the United States Postal Service have

5 done an outstanding job of delivering the mail dur6 ing this time of national emergency; and

7 (2) Congress will work with the United States

8 Postal Service to assure the safety and well-being of
3

•HCON 257 IH

1 postal workers as they carry out their duties and re2 sponsibilities, and of the general public.

Æ