alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Allen WEDDLE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 80CA1049.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. I.

July 29, 1982.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 19, 1982.

*1112J.D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Richard F. Hennessey, Deputy Atty. Gen., Mary J. Mullarkey, John T. Hyland, Asst. Attys. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.

J. Gregory Walta, Colorado State Public Defender, Charles F. Kaiser, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellant.

ENOCH, Chief Judge.

Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury of theft of auto parts with a value greater than $20. We affirm.

Defendant’s first contention is that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to prove that the batteries taken had a value of over $20. However, we conclude that the testimony of the property’s owner was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict.

Defendant’s next contention is that the trial court erred in failing to grant a new trial based upon newly-discovered evidence. We find no merit in this contention.

Defendant argues that the testimony of an accomplice, who was unavailable at the time of trial because of the assertion of her privilege against self-incrimination, became newly-discovered evidence at the time that the accomplice indicated that she would waive her privilege. He contends that he was entitled to a new trial based on this new evidence. However, this argument was considered and rejected in the case of *People v. Fletcher,*193 Colo. 314, 566 P.2d 345 (1977), and the principle of that case applies here.

Defendant’s final contention is that he was denied a fair trial because the prosecution unfairly deprived him of the exculpatory testimony of an accomplice by charging the accomplice with commission of a crime to induce her to assert her Fifth Amendment rights and not testify. We disagree.

Although an intentional, concerted effort by the prosecution to deprive a defendant of exculpatory testimony through intimidation of witnesses may deprive the defendant of a fair trial, *see, e.g., U.S. v. Morrison,*535 F.2d 223 (3d Cir. 1976), the *1113record in this case is devoid of any evidence that the prosecution engaged in any such misconduct. When a witness refuses to testify on behalf of a defendant because of the witness’ fear of punishment for criminal conduct, the defendant has not been denied a fair trial. *U.S. v. Herman,*589 F.2d 1191 (3d Cir. 1978).

Defendant contends that the prosecution’s decision to drop charges against the intended witness only eight days after defendant’s conviction is prima facie evidence of the prosecution’s bad faith. We do not agree with this contention.

A prosecutor has broad discretion concerning the conduct of prosecution, *Peo-*

*ple v. Fletcher, supra,*and we hold that the filing and/or subsequent dropping of charges against a witness does not, of itself, constitute an abuse of discretion or supply prima facie evidence of a sinister motive. Because defendant failed to introduce any other evidence to support his contention, he did not demonstrate that he was denied a fair trial.

The judgment is affirmed.

BERMAN and VAN CISE, JJ., concur.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-11-0653 SAT Date: 10/4/2011 Print Date: 8/7/2012

Related cases : Health related cases : Ecotox related cases:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 1 Health: PMN ; Eco: intact material 2 3 Health: Degradation/Incineration Product ; Eco: high concern for toxicity incomplete incineration products to terrestrial organisms

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 3 1 1 PMN 3 2 2 Inc Pdt

Exposure Based Review : Health: N o Ecotox: N o
Routes of exposure : Health: Inhalation Ecotox: N o releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: LUNG
Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-11-0653 FATE: Solid S = N egl. VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) POTW removal (%) = 50-90 via sorptionTime for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg > mo Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong PBT Potential: P3B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption is nil all routes based on physical/chemical p roperties. There is concern for lung effects if respirable particles are inhaled based on lung overload from high molecular weight polymers and waterproofing of the lungs. Low moderate concern.
For the potential incomplete incineration product/ environmental degradation product, based on test data for the analogue concerns are liver toxicity, blood toxicity, and male reproductive toxicity [rat 28-day oral NOAEL = 50 mg/kg, LOAEL = 150 mg/kg with liver toxicity; rat 90-day oral LOAEL = 10 mg/kg based on decreased body weight in males at all doses and liver toxicity and anemia at 200 mg/kg; there were toxic effects on the testes in 2 males in the 90-day oral study that were judged by the reviewer to be indicative of the potential for male reproductive toxicity. There is also concern for immunosuppression and oncogenicity based on data for Moderate concern. Test Data: negative in Salmonella and E coli

Ecotox :
Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 * fish

_ chronic value * daphnid

_ chronic value *
algal

_ chronic value *
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for nonionic polymers; SAR chemical class = solid with mp unknown (P); S < 0.001 mg /L at 20 C(P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;
high concern for toxicity from theFactors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) *

SARs nonionic polymers SAR Class
Ecotox Category

Ecotox Factors Comments:

SAT Chair: Becky Jones
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

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 pending on appeal before this 

Court and that the decisions in those cases may resolve an issue raised in the present 

application for leave to appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE 

pending the decisions in those cases. 

s0122 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

January 29, 2007 

 Clerk
#### Fird GROVER, d/b/a Grover Truck and Dozer Service v. Michael A. CARTER and Mike Carter Construction Company.

No. 86-C-2425.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 23, 1987.

In re Grover, Fird d/b/a; Grover Truck and Dozer Serv.; applying for writ of cer-tiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 86 CA 273; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “C”, No. 304-426.

Prior report: La.App., 498 So.2d 132.

Denied. Result is correct.
1

Schaffner, Karen S.

From: Schaffner, Karen S.

Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 10:39 AM

To: 'bhoene@marathonoil.com'

Cc: Shedd.Steve@epamail.epa.gov

Subject: RTR MVL: telecon summary for IN Marathon Petroleum Clarksville Terminal

Attachments: Telecon_BHoene_MarathonOil_2010May20.doc

Hi Ben: Thank you for talking with me this morning. I typed up a draft summary of our conversation, attached. If you 

have a few minutes, please review it to make certain I understood correctly. 

Thanks, Karen 

Karen Schaffner

Air Quality Engineering Group

RTI International

3040 Cornwallis Rd (800 Park, C311)

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

phone: (919) 316 3740

fax: (919) 541 7155
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH

NO. 02-17-00220-CV

In the Interest of G.V., III and G.V.,
Children §

§

§

§

§ From the 323rd District Court

of Tarrant County (323-102780-16)

December 18, 2017

Opinion by Justice Kerr

Dissent by Justice Walke r



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the tria l court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appellants Fa ther and Mother shall pay all of the

costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Elizabeth Ke rr__________________ Justice Elizabeth Kerr
----

| 1. | The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Grande Communications Holdings, Inc. for the three months ended March 31, 2009 filed on the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”); and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Grande Communications Holdings, Inc. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: May 14, 2009 | /s/    ROY H. CHESTNUTT                               |
|--------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|               | Roy H. Chestnutt                                                          |
|               | President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors |

| Date: May 14, 2009 | /s/    MICHAEL L. WILFLEY |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|               | Michael L. Wilfley                            |
|               | Chief Financial Officer                       |

----
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 45 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. J. RES. 45

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
allow the States to limit the period of time United States Senators and 
                       Representatives may serve.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 13, 2000

Mr. Ashcroft introduced the following joint resolution; which was read 
          twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
allow the States to limit the period of time United States Senators and 
                       Representatives may serve.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is hereby proposed as 
an amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. Each State or the people thereof may prescribe the 
maximum number of terms to which a person may be elected or appointed 
to the Senate of the United States.
    ``Section 2. Each State or the people thereof may prescribe the 
maximum number of terms to which a person may be elected to the House 
of Representatives of the United States.
    ``Section 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have 
been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures 
of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date 
of its submission to the States by the Congress.''.
                                 <all>
```
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 29

Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the conviction of ten members

of Iran’s Jewish community.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 13, 2001

Mr. ENGEL (for himself and Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International

Relations

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the

conviction of ten members of Iran’s Jewish community.

Whereas on the eve of the Jewish holiday of Passover 1999,

13 Jews, including community and religious leaders in

the cities of Shiraz and Isfahan, were arrested by the authorities of the Islamic Republic of Iran and accused of

spying for the United States and Israel;

Whereas the 13 defendants were tried in a Revolutionary

Court that was closed to all independent journalists, outside media, international observers, and family members;

Whereas no evidence was brought forth at these trials other

than taped ‘‘confessions’’;

Whereas Jews in Iran are prohibited from holding any positions that would give them access to state secrets;
2

•HCON 29 IH

Whereas the judge in the case also served as prosecutor, chief

investigator, and arbiter of punishment;

Whereas the Secretary of State has identified the case of the

13 Jews in Shiraz as ‘‘one of the barometers of United

States-Iran relations’’;

Whereas countless nations have expressed their concern for

these individuals and especially their human rights under

the rule of law;

Whereas ten of the 13 Jews were convicted on July 1, 2000,

of spying for Israel, and were sentenced to prison terms

of four to 13 years;

Whereas the head of state of Iran has the authority to pardon the ten Iranian Jews;

Whereas the international community, including former

President Clinton, has condemned the convictions;

Whereas Iran must show signs of respecting human rights as

a prerequisite for improving its relationship with the

United States; and

Whereas President Khatami and the Iranian Parliament were

elected on a platform of moderation and reform: Now,

therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the

3 United States Government—

4 (1) should condemn, in the strongest possible

5 terms, the arrest of the 13 Jews by the authorities

6 of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the unfair proce7 dures employed against them leading up to and
3

•HCON 29 IH

1 throughout their trials, and the convictions of ten of

2 the 13 Jews by such authorities;

3 (2) should demand that these convictions be

4 overturned and that the individuals be released

5 forthwith;

6 (3) should call on the Government of Iran to

7 pardon the ten Iranian Jews; and

8 (4) should ensure that Iran’s handling of this

9 case is a benchmark for determining the nature of

10 current and future United States-Iran relations.

Æ
0008^

Notice of APPEAL

This notice of appeal is filed by Sandy Schinzel, Charles Tate jr party to this proceeding who seeks to

alter the trials courts judgment or other appealable order.

1. The trial court, cause number, and style of this case are as shown in the caption above.

2. The judgment or order appeal frOom w2as signed on date, Thursday,03-19-19

3. Sandy Schinzel desires to appeal from all portions of the judgment 10 days to vacate premises

4.This appeal is being to court of 4th floor COURT of appeals

5.This notice is being filed by Sandy Schinzel jointly by the following psrties whose interests are

aligned: Sandy Schinzel

-■--;■
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 23


                CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 33-43981, Form S-8 No. 33-63456, Form S-8 No. 33-82108, Form S-8
No. 33-12611 and Form S-8 No. 333-26735) pertaining to the Stock Option Plans of
U.S. Bioscience, Inc., the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-77376) and
related prospectus of U.S. Bioscience, Inc. for the registration of 1,096,634
shares of its common stock issuable upon exercise of certain warrants issued
pursuant to the January 19, 1995 settlement of certain class-action suits and
derivative litigations brought against U.S. Bioscience, Inc. and the
Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-00077) and related prospectus of U.S.
Bioscience, Inc. for the registration of 8,142,578 shares of its common stock
issuable in connection with the December 1995 private placement, of our report
dated February 12, 1998 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of
U.S. Bioscience, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 1997.

                                    /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 20, 1998
[No. 17434-1-II.

Division Two.

August 9, 1996.]

#### *In the Matter of the Estate of*Victor Goldman. Pearl Goldman, *Appellant,*v. Agnes Volkirch, et al., *Respondents.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Pierce County, No. 89-4-00609-2, Frederick W. Fleming, J., entered July 9, 1993. *Reversed*by unpublished opinion per Armstrong, J., concurred in by Turner and Bridgewater, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 413 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 413

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

  Honoring the invention of modern air-conditioning by Dr. Willis H. 
           Carrier on the occasion of its 100th anniversary.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 413

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas on July 17, 1902, Dr. Willis H. Carrier submitted designs to a printing 
        plant in Brooklyn, New York, for equipment to control temperature, 
        humidity, ventilation, and air quality, marking the birth of modern air 
        conditioning;
Whereas air-conditioning has become an integral technology enabling the 
        advancement of society through improvements to the Nation's health and 
        well-being, manufacturing processes, building capacities, research, 
        medical capabilities, food preservation, art and historical 
        conservation, and general productivity and indoor comfort;
Whereas Dr. Carrier debuted air-conditioning technology for legislative activity 
        in the House of Representatives Chamber in 1928, and the Senate Chamber 
        in 1929;
Whereas the air-conditioning industry now totals $36 billion on a global basis 
        and employs more than 700,000 people in the United States; and
Whereas the year 2002 marks the 100th anniversary of modern air-conditioning: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress honors the invention of modern air-conditioning by 
Dr. Willis H. Carrier on the occasion of its 100th anniversary.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 15, 2002.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 360 Agreed to House (ATH)]

107th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 360

Providing for a conditional adjournment of the House of Representatives 
          and conditional recess or adjournment of the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 20, 2002

   Mr. Goss submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Providing for a conditional adjournment of the House of Representatives 
          and conditional recess or adjournment of the Senate.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Wednesday, March 
20, 2002, or Thursday, March 21, 2002, on a motion offered pursuant to 
this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee, it 
stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, April 9, 2002, or until 
Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this 
concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the Senate 
recesses or adjourns at the close of business on Thursday, March 21, 
2002, Friday, March 22, 2002, or Saturday, March 23, 2002, on a motion 
offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader 
or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Monday, 
April 8, 2002, or at such other time on that day as may be specified in 
the motion to recess or adjourn, 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.
                                 <all>
```