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



### MEMORANDUM OPI NIO N
No. 04-10-00669- CR
IN RE Tony ALCORTA Orig inal Mandamus Proce eding 1
PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Kar en Ang elini, J ustice

Phy lis J . Speedlin, J ustice Marialy n Ba rnar d, J ustice Deliver ed and F iled: September 29, 2010
PETI TI ON F OR WR I T OF MANDAMUS DEN I ED On September 16, 2010, re l at o r T o n y Alcorta filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on his pro se “Petition for Writ of Habe as Corpus for Release Be cause of Fa ilure to Prose cute and Speedy Trial Violation.” Howeve r, counsel has been appointed to repr esent relator in the criminal proce eding pen d i ng in the t rial court for which he is

curr ently confine d. A criminal defe ndant is not entitled to hy brid repr esenta tion. See Robinson v

. State , 240 S.W .3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. State , 906 S.W .2d 481, 4 9 8 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). A trial cour t has no leg al dut y to rule on pro se motions or petitions filed with
reg ard to a criminal proce eding in which the defe ndant is repr esente d by counsel. See Robinson , 240

1 ... T h i s p r o c e e d i n g a r i s e s o u t o f C a u s e N o . 2 0 0 9

- C R

- 1 0 3 0 2 , s t y l e d S t a t e o f T e x a s v
. T o n y A l c o r t a , p e n d i n g i n t h e 3 9 9 t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t C o u r t , B e x a r C o u n t y , T e x a s , t h e H o n o r a b l e J u a n i t a V a s q u e z - G a r d n e r p r e s i d i n g .0 4

- 1 0

- 0 0 6 6 9

- C R

S.W .3d at 922. Consequently , the trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining t o ru l e o n rela tor’s pro se petition filed in the criminal proce eding pending in the trial court. Acc ording ly , the petition is denied. T E X
. R. A P P
. P. 52.8(a)

. PER C URI AM
DO NOT PUBL I SH

- 2

-
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, David M. Sankaran,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of NightHawk Radiology Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2010
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of NightHawk Radiology Holdings, Inc.



|                       |  |  |  |        |  |                                                                                                  
|---------------------- |  |  |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: November 3, 2010 |  |  |  | By:    |  | /s/    DAVID M.
SANKARAN                                                                         
|                       |  |  |  | Name:  |  | David M. Sankaran                                                                                
|                       |  |  |  | Title: |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, John A. Flanagan, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the MacroShares $100 Oil Up Trust;

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;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a.

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b.

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c.

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors, the board of managers of Macro Securities Depositor, LLC, and the audit committee of MacroMarkets LLC (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a.

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b.

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves persons who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: February 17, 2009

| |                                                              
| | -------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ JOHN A. FLANAGAN                                         
| | John A. Flanagan                                             
| | Chief Financial Officer of Depositor, on behalf of
Registrant
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
                        RAMTRON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION
                              1999 STOCK OPTION PLAN

Ramtron International Corporation's 1999 Stock Option Plan (the "Plan") shall
be amended as follows:

The text of Section 8 of the Plan, entitled "Nontransferability of Options,"
is hereby deleted in its entirety.

A new sub-section is hereby inserted as Section 8 to read in its entirety as
follows:

     "Nontransferability of Options.  Options granted under this Plan may not
     be sold, pledged, assigned, hypothecated, gifted, transferred or disposed
     of in any manner, either voluntarily or involuntarily by operation of
     law, other than by will, by the laws of descent and distribution,
     transfers between spouses incident to a divorce, or in accordance with
     the following exceptions.

     Notwithstanding the foregoing, an Option granted under the 1999 Plan may
     be transferred by the optionee between spouses, incident to a divorce, in
     which case the option is only exercisable by the spouse to whom the
     option is transferred, to a trust or trusts established for the exclusive
     benefit of solely one or more members of his or her "immediate family,"
     or transfers to a partnership in which optionee's immediate family, as
     defined in the 1999 Plan, are the only partners and is exercisable only
     by the optionee or his or her legal guardian during the lifetime of the
     optionee or, in the event of death of the optionee, by the estate of the
     optionee or by a person who acquires the rights to exercise the option by
     bequest or inheritance.  Any Option held by the transferee will continue
     to be subject to the same terms and conditions that were applicable to
     the Option immediately prior to the transfer, except that the Option will
     be transferable by the transferee only by will or the laws of descent and
     distribution.  For purposes hereof, "immediate family," means the
     optionee's children, stepchildren, grandchildren, parents, stepparents,
     grandparents, spouse, siblings (including half brothers and sisters),
     in-laws, and relationships arising because of legal adoption."

Dated:  July 25, 2000
#### Lowrant KELLY (a/k/a Lester) # 91547, Petitioner Pro Se, v. The OKLAHOMA PARDON AND PAROLE BOARD, et al., Respondents.

No. O-81-552.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

Nov. 10, 1981.

Lowrant Kelly, pro se.

Rozia M. McKinney, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, Okl., for Okl. Pardon and Parole Bd.

ORDER DENYING WRIT OF MANDAMUS

The petitioner claims to be the victim of an unconstitutional act. An inmate of the Joseph Harp Correctional Center, at Lexington, Oklahoma, the petitioner is complaining, not of any act of the Legislature, but of the respondents’ policies regarding consideration for parole. In 1980, the petitioner was notified that a parole docket date had been set for him in September, 1981. Then, in April, 1981, the respondent changed its method of determining parole docket dates and the petitioner was assigned a new docket date in November of 1982. The petitioner thinks this is unfair.

Neither the Oklahoma Constitution nor the United States Constitution gives a prisoner any right to be considered for parole. *Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex,*442 U.S. 1, 99 S.Ct. 2100, 60 L.Ed.2d 668; *Phillips v. Williams,*608 P.2d 1131, (Okl.1980). And the only statutory provision is 57 O.S.Supp. 1980, § 332.7, which requires a prisoner to complete a certain fraction of the sentence before he or she can be considered for parole. The petitioner does not challenge the statute.

The operational memoranda at issue here merely set forth the mechanism by which the respondent exercises the discretion given it by the Legislature. Being given a parole docket date does not mean that a prisoner is going to be placed on parole; it means that a prisoner is going to be *considered*for parole. There is a possibility that parole may be granted; there is also a possibility that parole may be denied. Also, a change in the parole docket date does not change the date on which a prisoner be*859comes eligible for parole. It merely changes the date on which the Board elects to consider him or her for parole.

Since the petitioner has been given no recognized liberty interest by having a docket date set, he has not been deprived of any constitutional right by having that date changed.

IT IS THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THIS COURT that the petition for a writ of mandamus should be, and hereby is, denied.

WITNESS OUR HANDS AND THE SEAL OF THIS COURT this 10th day of November, 1981.

TOM BRETT, P. J.

HEZ J. BUSSEY, J.

TOM R. CORNISH, J.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 130397 & (17) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 130397 COA: 265985 Genesee CC: 05-015428-FH LAURIE JEROME BONIOR, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is DENIED. The application for leave to appeal the November 21, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the cases of People v Harper, (Docket No. 130988) and People v Burns, (Docket No. 131898) are pend ing on appeal before this Court and that the decisions in those cases may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to app eal, we ORDER that the applic ation be held in ABEYANCE pending the decisions in those cases.

s0122 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 29, 2007

Clerk
A "M/S^iM!JmB/m/s JvfjJtH 4 A

(Ofi^S^L

(^^^ &*£L

^zt&etSjL

<#&->

^f^e^A .^f?^

jS-

^*^_^^^^5^&^^^L^^_^^^^

^^6l '*' t
JLam

aZ^^M-^u&

A I. 'o-zs-jio/s

^ZK#/_

i^^k&&0^^

/

r i'
<^5^_>_c/i**iC

.$rcooc^O-Jj>y4 l-Q—Z3-^5a/5

^-fydaj:/-.

' ^ /'j&^£'Y^ *

.«/

Ad^_&-,g*&i4

i i • i
[No. 19104-1-II.

Division Two.

June 7, 1996.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Thomas A. Sherrill, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Mason County, No. 90-1-00045-1, Toni A. Sheldon, J., entered January 26, 1995. *Reversed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 390 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 390

   Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the establishment of a 
           National Correctional Officers and Employees Week.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 2002

  Mr. Sweeney (for himself, Mr. Holden, Mr. Strickland, and Mr. Horn) 
 submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to 
                   the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of Congress regarding the establishment of a 
           National Correctional Officers and Employees Week.

Whereas the operation of correctional facilities represents a crucial component 
        of the criminal justice system;
Whereas correctional officers and employees play a vital role in safeguarding 
        the public from criminal activity;
Whereas correctional officers and employees work under demanding circumstances 
        and face danger in their daily work;
Whereas correctional officers and employees in New York City assisted in the 
        rescue effort in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 
        2001; and
Whereas the Senate has recognized the first week of May as National Correctional 
        Officers and Employees Week: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) a National Correctional Officers and Employees Week 
        should be established; and
            (2) the President should issue a proclamation calling on 
        the people of the United States to observe such a week with 
        appropriate ceremonies and activities.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a),

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Glenn R. Cole, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of NightHawk Radiology Holdings, 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;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

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

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including
its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other
certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent functions):

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.

Date: July 31, 2007



/s/ GLENN R. COLEGlenn R. ColeSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0562 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ROBERT EARL STAUDENMAYER ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 25 , 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 16 2021

09/16/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0562
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 354 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 354

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2002

   Received and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the District of Columbia 
              Special Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR D.C. SPECIAL 
              OLYMPICS LAW ENFORCEMENT TORCH RUN.

    On June 7, 2002, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House 
of Representatives and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the 
Senate may jointly designate, the 2002 District of Columbia Special 
Olympics Law Enforcement Torch Run (in this resolution referred to as 
the ``event'') may be run through the Capitol Grounds as part of the 
journey of the Special Olympics torch to the District of Columbia 
Special Olympics summer games at Gallaudet University in the District 
of Columbia.

SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

    The Capitol Police Board shall take such actions as may be 
necessary to carry out the event.

SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARATIONS.

    The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions for physical 
preparations for the event.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS.

    The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforcement of the 
restrictions contained in section 4 of the Act of July 31, 1946 (40 
U.S.C. 193d; 60 Stat. 718), concerning sales, advertisements, displays, 
and solicitations on the Capitol Grounds, as well as other restrictions 
applicable to the Capitol Grounds, in connection with the event.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 30, 2002.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit  99.2



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In  connection  with  the  Annual  Report  of  Lifecell  Corporation  (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-K  for  the year ended December 31, 2002 filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"), I, Paul G. Thomas, Chief
Executive  Officer  of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The  Report  fully  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
          the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents, in all
          material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company
          as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of
          the  Company  for  the  periods  presented.

Dated: March 26, 2003


                                        /s/ Paul Thomas
                                     --------------------------------------
                                        Paul G. Thomas
                                        Chairman of the Board
                                        President & Chief Executive Officer




A  SIGNED  ORIGINAL  OF  THIS WRITTEN STATEMENT REQUIRED BY SECTION 906 HAS BEEN
PROVIDED  TO  LIFECELL  CORPORATION AND WILL BE RETAINED BY LIFECELL CORPORATION
AND  FURNISHED  TO  THE  SECURITIES  AND  EXCHANGE  COMMISSION OR ITS STAFF UPON
REQUEST.


<PAGE>