alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. 

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL 

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE 

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent, 

v.

THOMAS NOUAN, Petitioner. 

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0375 PRPC 

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County 

No. CR1997-093519 

The Honorable Christina Henderson, Judge Pro Tempore

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED 

COUNSEL 

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix 

By Douglas Gerlach 

Counsel for Respondent 

The Law Office of Brent E. Graham, PLLC, Flagstaff 

By Brent E. Graham 

Counsel for Petitioner 

FILED 3-21-2024
STATE v. NOUAN 

Decision of the Court 

2 

MEMORANDUM DECISION 

Presiding Judge Anni Hill Foster, Judge Brian Y. Furuya, and Vice Chief 

Judge Randall M. Howe delivered the decision of the Court. 

PER CURIAM: 

¶1 Petitioner Thomas Nouan seeks review of the superior court’s 

order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. This is Petitioner’s 

third successive petition. 

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19, 278 P.3d 1276, 1280 (2012). It is 

Petitioner’s burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by 

denying the petition for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 

537, ¶ 1, 260 P.3d 1102, 1103 (App. 2011) (Petitioner has burden of 

establishing abuse of discretion on review). 

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find that Petitioner has not established an abuse of 

discretion. 

¶4 We grant review and deny relief.
CCC COMMODITY INVENTORY

As of May 31, 2020

(Million Units Except as Noted) OUTSTANDING UNDER LOAN CCC-OWNED

CY 2018 CY 2019 INVENTORY 2/

(Actual Units)

BUTTER (LB) - - 0.0

CHEESE (LB) - - 0.0

NONFAT DRY MILK (LB) - - 0.0

BARLEY (BU) 0.0 2.8 0.0

CORN (BU) 1.3 516.1 0.0

OATS (BU) 0.0 0.6 0.0

SORGHUM (BU) 0.0 1.1 0.0

SOYBEANS (BU) 0.0 99.4 0.0

WHEAT (BU) 0.0 34.7 0.0

RICE (CWT) 0.0 11.7 0.0

REFINED SUGAR (Mil. Lbs.) 15.0 615.5 0.0

 IN-PROCESS BEET 0.0 648.5 0.0

RAW CANE SUGAR (Mil. Lbs.) 0.0 981.7 0.0

 IN-PROCESS CANE 0.0 0.0 0.0

HONEY (Mil. Lbs.) 0.0 7.2 0.0

PEANUTS (tons) 0.0 948,500.0 0.00

CANOLA SEED (CWT) 1/ 0.0 1,389.0 0.0

CRAMBE (CWT) 1/ 0.0 0.0 0.0

FLAXSEED (CWT) 1/ 0.0 25.0 0.0

MUSTARD SEED (CWT) 1/ 0.0 1.0 0.0

RAPESEED (CWT) 1/ 0.0 0.0 0.0

SAFFLOWER SEED (CWT) 1/ 4.0 4.0 0.0

SESAME SEED (CWT) 1/ 0.0 0.0 0.0

SUNFLOWER SEED (OIL) (CWT) 1/ 0.0 229.0 0.0

SUNFLOWER SEED (Other) (CWT) 1/ 0.0 3.0 0.0

DRY PEAS (CWT) 1/ 0.0 927.0 0.0

LENTILS (CWT) 1/ 35.0 153.0 0.0

CHICKPEAS (CWT) 1/ 6.0 311.0 0.0

UPLAND COTTON (BALE) 2,100.0 2,473,000.0 0.0

ELS COTTON (BALE) 0.0 271,600.0 0.0

1/ Minor Oilseeds & Pulses are in thousand units.

2/ CCC acquired 2018 Crop Year upland cotton as follows: 

15 bales from June 2019, 81 bales from July 2019, 2,996 bales from August 2019, 17,630 bales September 2019,

24,633 bales from October 2019, 7,325 bales from November 2019, 12,066 bales from December 2019, 

2,234 bales from January 2020, 58 bales from February 2020; 4,330 bales from March 2020; 

2 bales from April 2020 maturing loans. 

Following were multiple invitations that sold 8,264 bales in September; 39,325 bales in November, 

7,899 bales in December; 9,697 bales sold in January; 1,513 bales in February; 3,856 bales in March; 

822 bales in April. In total, there were 0 bales of upland cotton in inventory on May 31, 2020.

CCC also acquired 2018 Crop Year peanuts as follows: 4,559.12 tons from July 2019, 37,417.73 tons from 

August 2019, 37,845.19 tons from September 2019, 4,735.16 tons from October, 4,054.36 tons from 

November, and December 2,025.31 tons maturing loans.

Total CCC peanut forfeitures for Crop Year 2018 were 84,719.20 tons. CCC sold 340.51 tons from Invitation 

No. 8, 28,563.44 tons from Invitation No. 9, 13,052.09 tons from Invitation No. 10, 34,005.36 tons from

Invitation No. 11, 3,846.40 tons from Invitation No.12, 4,268.73 tons from Invitation No. 13, 0 tons from 

Invitation 14, 2,780.41 from Invitation 15, 1,249.44 tons from Invitation 16, 667.18 tons from Invitation 17, 

2025.31 tons from Invitation 19. 

This brought the total CCC peanut inventory to 0.00 tons as of May 31, 2020. 

Report Completed: June 18, 2020
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ALLEN NEAL,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 98 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 22nd day of September, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
EXHIBIT 35.1





SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT








I, Ryan M. Hershberger, certify that:





(a)    A review of the Servicer’s activities and of its performance under the applicable servicing agreement during the period from January 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023 has been made under my supervision.





(b)    To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the applicable servicing agreement in all material respects throughout the aforementioned period.








Dated March 19, 2024


/s/ Ryan M. HershbergerRyan M. HershbergerAssistant Treasurer ofFord Motor Credit Company LLC,as Servicer of Ford Credit Auto Owner Trust 2022-C
#### The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellant, v. John LOWE, Appellee.

No. O-79-557.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

March 9, 1981.

Rehearing Denied April 28, 1981.

Bill Roberson, Dist. Atty., David Welch, Asst. Dist. Atty., Chandler, for appellant.

Larry K. Lenora, Erwin, Butts & Lenora, P. C., Chandler, for appellee.

Jan Eric Cartwright, Atty. Gen., David W. Lee, Asst. Atty. Gen., Chief, Criminal Division, State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, for amicus curiae.

OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

The State appeals to this Court under Rule VI of the rules of this Court from *443an order of the District Court of Lincoln County affirming an order of the magistrate in Case No. CRF-7946 granting a motion to quash, or demurrer to the information, in that case on the ground of impermissible joinder of offenses in a single information, in violation of 22 O.S.1971, § 404. This holding conflicts with the previously expressed view of this Court that § 404 was repealed by implication upon enactment of 22 O.S.1971, §§ 436 and 440. See *Dodson v. State,*562 P.2d 916 (Okl.Cr.1977) (Brett, J., specially concurring); and *Phelps v. State,*598 P.2d 254 (Okl.Cr.1979). Appellee urges the reexamination of the *Dodson*holding by comparing 22 O.S.1971, §§ 436 et seq. to similar federal rules of criminal procedure. However, we are not persuaded that the *Dodson*rule should be re-examined. We reaffirm the view expressed therein. The rulings of the trial court and magistrate were in error.

Moreover, the proper method for challenging alleged prejudicial joinder under § 436 and *Dodson*is by application under 22 O.S.1971, § 439, rather than demurrer. Other arguments urged by appel-lee in support of the orders seem predicated on a characterization of the magistrate’s action as a severance due to prejudicial joinder. However, due to the lower courts’ reliance on § 404 in violation of *Dodson,*and due to the treatment of the issue in those courts as a Rule VI challenge to the granting of a demurrer or motion to quash the information, we will also deal with the case in that posture, and remand without prejudice to a proper application for relief from prejudicial joinder. The magistrate or trial court may then consider the issue apart from an erroneous reliance on Section 404.

BRETT, P. J., and CORNISH, J., concur.
#### Miguel RIOS-TALAMANTES, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 76-1821

Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 3, 1976.

Miguel Rios Talamantes, pro se.

John E. Clark, U.S. Atty., LeRoy Morgan Jahn, Ronald P. Guyer, Asst. U.S. Attys., San Antonio, Tex., for respondent-appellee.

Before COLEMAN, GOLDBERG and GEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 Rule 18, 5 Cir., *Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Company of New York et*al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, Miguel Rios-Talamantes, was indicted on January 18, 1973, for distribution of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Rios-Talamantes was convicted on a guilty plea.

Rios-Talamantes subsequently petitioned for relief from his sentence in the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He alleged that his indictment was invalid because it was signed by a “Special Attorney” rather than by the permanent United States Attorney or his assistant. He further alleged that the trial judge failed to address him personally prior to accepting his guilty plea. The district court found both contentions to be meritless and accordingly denied relief.

*95We have carefully reviewed the briefs and record in this case and find the decision of the district court to be free of error. The denial of relief is

AFFIRMED.
#### Brian Dale HAYS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Oklahoma, Appellee.

No. F-81-480.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma.

June 11, 1982.

*1312John F. Reichenberger, Woodward, for appellant.

Jan Eric Cartwright, Atty. Gen. of Oklahoma, Robert W. Cole, Asst. Atty. Gen., Oklahoma City, for appellee.

OPINION

BUSSEY, Judge:

The appellant, Brian Dale Hays, was tried in Woodward County, Oklahoma for the crime of Larceny of Automobile, After Former Conviction of a Felony, pursuant to 21 O.S.1981, § 1720, on March 18, 1981, Case No. CRF-80-214. He was convicted by the jury of the lesser included offense of Unauthorized Use of Motor Vehicle, 47 O.S. 1981, § 4-102. He was sentenced to four (4) years’ imprisonment and appeals.

The appellant was stopped on a routine traffic stop while driving a pickup truck in Cherokee, Oklahoma. Upon discovery that the pickup truck belonged to an Amoco Production plant located approximately eighty miles to the southwest of Cherokee, at Mooreland, Oklahoma, the appellant was apprehended. The appellant confessed at trial that he had taken the pickup from the Amoco plant. The only disputed issue was the appellant’s sanity.

The appellant’s sole allegation of error is that the trial court failed to grant a mistrial, or in the alternative, to admonish the jury following a comment made by the prosecutor during closing argument, to-wit:

> This type of person can’t be running up and down the street in the community committing crimes. The next time he does that, if he walks out of here it may be somebody in your family, it may be one of your friends, the next time this occurs maybe he runs into somebody and kills somebody ...

> MR. REICHENBERGER: Your Honor, I am going to object to that line of argument and also move for a mistrial.

> . THE COURT: Objection sustained, he is not on trial for running into anybody, confine your arguments to the facts.

Although it is improper for the prosecutor to argue that a defendant will commit future crimes if not convicted, see *Lime v. State,*479 P.2d 608 (Okl.Cr.1971), we cannot say that the prosecutor’s comments worked prejudice on the appellant. The appellant stood to receive a minimum of twenty years under 21 O.S.1981, § 51(B), as proof was made that he had been convicted of two previous felonies. The fact that the appellant was convicted of the lesser included offense and sentenced to four years’ imprisonment in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt amply demonstrates a lack of prejudice. The judgment and sentence is AFFIRMED.

BRETT, P. J., and CORNISH, J., concur.
#### STATE ex rel. Steven L. KENSEY v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 86-KH-1957.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 19, 1987.

In re Kensey, Steven L.; applying for remedial writ; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, Nos. 80-2, 81-524.

Denied.
​

**Exhibit 35.2**

**Servicer Compliance Statement of Deere Credit Services, Inc.**

​

I, Steven N. Owenson, Senior Vice President and Finance Director of Deere Credit Services, Inc., state:

​

A review of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s activities for the period from October 31, 2022 through October 29, 2023 (the “Reporting Period”) and of Deere Credit Services, Inc.’s performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 20, 2022 among John Deere Capital Corporation, John Deere Receivables LLC and John Deere Owner Trust 2022-B has been made under my supervision, and to the best of my knowledge based on such review, Deere Credit Services, Inc. has fulfilled all its obligations under all relevant agreements in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

​

​

​

| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |
|-----------------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
| Date: January 9, 2024 | Deere Credit Services, Inc. |
| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |
| ​               | By:                         | */s/ Steven N. Owenson*                    |
| ​               | ​                     | Steven N. Owenson                          |
| ​               | ​                     | Senior Vice President and Finance Director |
| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |
| ​               | ​                     | ​                                    |

​

​

----
CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Peter Hodyno, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Secure Digital, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge: (i)the annual report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the period  ended May 31, 2013, and to which this certification is attached as Exhibit 32 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(ii)the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  By:/s/Peter HodynoName:Peter HodynoTitle:Chief Executive Officer and ChiefFinancial OfficerDate:July 15, 2013 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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. This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
ANNUALCERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE  

 

OF 

 

SCP SERVICING,LLC 

 

 

**BMO 2022-C3Mortgage Trust**

 

**CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2022-C3**

 

 

 I, VartanDerbedrossian, the Chief Servicing Officer of SCP Servicing, LLC, a Delawarelimited liability company, as Primary Servicer and a Reporting Person(hereinafter the “Reporting Person”), under the Pooling and ServicingAgreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) dated as of October 1,2022, certify pursuant to Section 10.08 to the Certificate Administrator, theTrustee, and the Depositor (as those terms are defined in the Pooling andServicing Agreement) all of the following as of Feburary 27, 2023: 

 

(a)      that a review of the activities of theReporting Person during the period from 1/1/2022 to 12/31/2022 (the “ReportingPeriod”) and of its performance under this Pooling and Servicing Agreement hasbeen made under my supervision; 

 

(b)     that, to the best of my knowledge,based on such review, the Reporting Person has fulfilled all of its obligationsunder the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all material respects during theperiod from 1/1/2022 to 12/31/2022 (the “Reporting Period”) 

 

(c)      that the Reporting Person hasmaintained an effective internal control system over the servicing of mortgageloans including the Loans; and 

 

(d)     that the Reporting Person has notreceived any notice regarding qualification, or challenge to the status of anyTrust REMIC as a REMIC, from the IRS or any other governmental agency or body. 

 

 

 

 

 

IN WITNESSWHEREOF, this Certificate has been executed and is effective as of Feburary 27,2023.  

 

 

REPORTINGPERSON: 

 

**SCPServicing LLC,**

a Delawarelimited liability company 

 

 

 

By: /s/VartanDerbedrossian

Name: VartanDerbedrossian 

Title: Chief Servicing Officer
CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT 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
FalconTarget, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the
fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that to the undersigned’s knowledge:

(a) the Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;

and

(b) the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

FalconTarget, Inc.

Date: November 17, 2006

By:   /s/   Thomas Kirchner

Thomas Kirchner

Chief Executive Officer

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* 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.
**Exhibit 31.1**

Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification

I, Rajesh Kalathur, certify that:

​

1.I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of John Deere Owner Trust 2022 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

​

2.Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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, all of the distribution, servicing, and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

​

4.I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

​

5.All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

​

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank Trust Company, National Association (as indenture trustee).

​

​

| 4                      | ​ | ​                                     |
|------------------------|---------|---------------------------------------------|
| Date: January 26, 2024 | By:     | */s/ Rajesh Kalathur*                       |
| ​                | ​ | Rajesh Kalathur                             |
| ​                | ​ | President of John Deere Capital Corporation |
| ​                | ​ | (as Servicer)                               |

​

----
**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,
      Peter
      J. Anderson, 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 of
      Prestige Brands Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
      2006
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, as applicable, and that information contained in such
      Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of Prestige Brands Holdings,
      Inc.




**/s/
                P****eter****J. A****nderson**Name:Peter
                J. AndersonTitle:Chief
                Financial OfficerDate:August
                9, 2006
BE Sugarcane (Bt Insect-Resistant Varie�es) Crop Summary

BE Sugarcane Events poten�ally in the Food Supply

BE Event Trait Countries Comments FDA Review

CTB141175/01-A 

(CTC175-A)

Cry1Ab – insect 

resistance

Brazil, Canada, 

United States

FDA approved 

for food

BNF - 159

CTC-92015-7 Cry1Ac – insect 

resistance

Brazil

CTC75064-3 Cry1Ac – insect 

resistance

Brazil, Canada

CTC91087-6 Cry1Ac – insect 

resistance

Brazil, United 

States

FDA approved 

for food and 

feed

BNF - 169

CTC93209 Cry1Ac – insect 

resistance

Brazil

CTC95019-5 Cry1Ac – insect 

resistance

Brazil

MON87427 × 

MON95379 × 

MON87411

Cry1Da_7, Cry1B.868, 

Cry3Bb1— insect 

resistance; Herbicide 

tolerance

Brazil

BE Sugarcane Produc�on

Brazil has begun commercial produc�on of insect-resistant sugarcane. 

BE Sugarcane Food Safety Reviews

The FDA completed a biotechnology consulta�on on two varie�es of BE sugarcane in 2018 and 

2020.

References

FDA Biotechnology Consulta�ons on Food from GE Plant Varie�es

htps://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fdcc/?set=Biocon

ISAAA Global Status of Commercialized Biotech-GM Crops – 2023

htps://www.isaaa.org/gmapprovaldatabase/crop/default.asp?CropID=27