alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 41940

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

COLE TYRELL ROBINSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2015 Unpublished Opinion No. 468

Filed: April 16, 2015

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Twin 

Falls County. Hon. G. Richard Bevan, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and aggregate sentence of twenty years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of eight years, for misappropriation of personal identifying 

information, grand theft, two counts of fraud by computer, fifteen counts of 

forgery, and three counts of criminal possession of a financial transaction 

card, affirmed.

Sara B. Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Justin M. Curtis, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

Before MELANSON, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge;

and GUTIERREZ, Judge

________________________________________________

PER CURIAM 

Cole Tyrell Robinson was found guilty of misappropriation of personal identifying 

information, I.C. § 18-3126; grand theft, I.C. §§ 18-2403(1) and (3) and 18-2407(1)(b); two 

counts of fraud by computer, I.C. § 18-2202(1); fifteen counts of forgery, I.C. § 18-3601; and 
2

three counts of possession of a financial transaction card, I.C. § 18-3125.1

 The district court 

sentenced Robinson to a determinate term of five years for misappropriation of personal 

identifying information, a determinate term of five years for grand theft, determinate terms of 

eight years for two counts of fraud by computer, and determinate terms of eight years for fifteen 

counts of forgery, all to run concurrently and sentenced Robinson to consecutive indeterminate 

terms of four years for three counts of criminal possession of a financial transaction card. Thus, 

Robinson’s aggregate sentence is a unified term of twenty years, with a minimum period of 

confinement of eight years. Robinson appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Robinson’s judgment of conviction and sentences are affirmed.

 

1 Robinson was adjudicated as being a persistent violator, I.C. § 19-2514, based upon 

convictions for prior felonies.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000016343
<NAME> CALIFORNIA JOCKEY CLUB
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,378
<SECURITIES>                                     6,758
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,378
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 9,514
<PP&E>                                          28,357
<DEPRECIATION>                                (15,691)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  22,180
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              505
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            58
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,617
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,180
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,205
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,741
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,464
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,464
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,464
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .25
        

</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register: April 30, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 83)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 22693]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30ap10-1]                         

========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
week.

========================================================================

[[Page 22693]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2009-0328; Directorate Identifier 2008-NE-44-AD; 
Amendment 39-16161; AD 2010-01-04]
RIN 2120-AA64

 
Airworthiness Directives; General Electric Company (GE) CF34-1A, 
CF34-3A, and CF34-3B Series Turbofan Engines; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting airworthiness directive (AD) 2010-01-04, 
which published in the Federal Register. That AD applies to GE CF34-1A, 
CF34-3A, and CF34-3B series turbofan engines. The docket number is 
incorrect in all three of its locations. This document corrects those 
references. In all other respects, the original document remains the 
same.

DATES: Effective April 30, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Frost, Aerospace Engineer, Engine 
Certification Office, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New 
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-7756; 
fax: (781) 238-7199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 8, 2010 (75 FR 1017), we 
published a final rule AD, FR Doc. E9-31274, in the Federal Register. 
That AD applies to GE CF34-1A, CF34-3A, and CF34-3B series turbofan 
engines. We need to make the following correction:

Sec.  39.13  [Corrected]

    On page 1017, in the first column, under 14 CFR Part 39, ``Docket 
No. FAA-2008-0328'' is corrected to read ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0328''.
    On page 1018, in the first column, under Comments Invited, starting 
in the ninth line, ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0328'' is corrected to read 
``Docket No. FAA-2009-0328''.
    On page 1018, in the third column, under Sec.  39.13 [Amended], 
starting in the eighth line, ``Docket No. FAA-2008-0328'' is corrected 
to read ``Docket No. FAA-2009-0328''.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on April 23, 2010.
Peter A. White,
Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft 
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-9962 Filed 4-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
Exhibit 23.2
 
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 
 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (No. 333-232492) on Form N-2 and on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-227117, 333-207296, 333-177433, 333-177432, 333-118681) of Capital Southwest Corporation of our report dated May 11, 2020, relating to the financial statements of I-45 SLF LLC, included as an exhibit to this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Capital Southwest Corporation for the year ended March 31, 2020.
 
 /s/ RSM US LLP
 
 Chicago, Illinois
 June 2, 2020
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1424 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1424

   To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure the Secretary of 
  Veterans Affairs permits the display of Fallen Soldier Displays in 
                          national cemeteries.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 28, 2019

   Mr. Gonzalez of Ohio (for himself, Mr. Chabot, Mr. Wenstrup, Mrs. 
 Beatty, Mr. Jordan, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Johnson of Ohio, Mr. Turner, Mr. 
    Ryan, Ms. Fudge, Mr. Gibbs, Mr. Stivers, Mr. Joyce of Ohio, Mr. 
    Davidson of Ohio, Mr. Latta, and Mr. Balderson) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure the Secretary of 
  Veterans Affairs permits the display of Fallen Soldier Displays in 
                          national cemeteries.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fallen Warrior Battlefield Cross 
Memorial Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR FALLEN SOLDIER DISPLAYS IN NATIONAL 
              CEMETERIES.

    Section 2403 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(d)(1) Subject to standards established by the Secretary, the 
Secretary shall permit the display of a Fallen Soldier Display in any 
national cemetery.
    ``(2) In this subsection, the term `Fallen Soldier Display' means a 
memorial monument in honor of fallen members of the Armed Forces that 
may include a replica of an inverted rifle, boots, helmets, and 
identification tag.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1408 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1408

To amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to eliminate the 
         applicability of such Act to the District of Columbia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 27, 2019

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to eliminate the 
         applicability of such Act to the District of Columbia.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``District of Columbia Non-
Discrimination Home Rule Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF APPLICABILITY OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION 
              ACT TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

    Paragraph (2) of section 5 of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act 
of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb-2(2)) is amended by striking ``the District 
of Columbia,'' and the comma after ``Puerto Rico''.
                                 <all>
```
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.

RUDY HELENICK, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 16-0236 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR-127204

The Honorable Margaret R. Mahoney, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Diane Meloche

Counsel for Respondent

Rudy Helenick, Tucson

Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in which 

Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen and Judge Jennifer B. Campbell joined.

FILED 8-17-2017
STATE v. HELENICK

Decision of the Court

2

B R O W N, Judge:

¶1 Rudy Helenick petitions this court for review of the summary 

dismissal of his untimely and successive notices of post-conviction relief. 

We have considered the petition for review and, for the reasons stated, 

grant review and deny relief.

¶2 A jury convicted Helenick of six counts of first degree 

burglary, six counts of armed robbery, and nineteen counts of kidnapping.

The trial court sentenced him as a repetitive offender to consecutive and 

concurrent terms of imprisonment totaling 84 years. This court affirmed 

the convictions and sentences on appeal. State v. Helenick, 1 CA-CR 7241 

(Ariz. App. Mar. 14, 1985) (mem. decision).

¶3 Between 2001 and 2013, Helenick commenced multiple 

proceedings for post-conviction relief, all of which were unsuccessful. In 

November 2015 and February 2016, Helenick filed notices of postconviction relief, seeking to raise claims of significant change in the law and 

violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 

(“ICCPR”). The trial court summarily dismissed the notices, finding that 

Helenick failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted in an 

untimely and successive post-conviction proceeding. This petition for 

review followed.

¶4 On review, Helenick argues he is entitled to relief on the 

grounds of significant change in the law based on Montgomery v. Louisiana, 

136 S. Ct. 718 (2016), and violation of the ICCPR. We review the summary 

dismissal of a post-conviction relief proceeding for abuse of discretion. 

State v. Bennett, 213 Ariz. 562, 566, ¶ 17 (2006).

¶5 The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief. 

In summarily dismissing the notices, the court issued a ruling that

identified, addressed, and correctly resolved the claims that Helenick 

sought to raise. Further, the court did so in a thorough, well-reasoned 

manner that will allow any future court to understand the ruling. Under
STATE v. HELENICK

Decision of the Court

3

these circumstances, “[n]o useful purpose would be served by this court 

rehashing the trial court’s correct ruling in a written decision.” State v. 

Whipple, 177 Ariz. 272, 274 (App. 1993). Adopting the trial court’s ruling, 

we grant review and deny relief.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          11,790
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  144,608
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (4,300)
<INVENTORY>                                    870,361
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,063,877
<PP&E>                                       2,405,855
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,059,538)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,199,633
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,532,677
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       734,787
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,085,913)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,199,633
<SALES>                                      2,477,229
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,477,229
<CGS>                                        2,089,074
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,089,074
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               305,198
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             131,484
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (48,527)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    32,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (80,527)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (80,527)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.3





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING OFFICER





PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)





The undersigned, George Zweier, does hereby certify to his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019 of the registrant:





(1)   The report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





(2)   The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.








Date: May 15, 2020/s/ George ZweierGeorge ZweierVice President (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
Fiscal Year 2021

Inspection & Weighing Program

Revenue Operating 

Expense Earnings / Loss Metric Tons

National $7,039,086 $6,687,477 $351,609 136,574,792

Field Offices

Portland Field Office $349,294 $610,928 -$261,634 4,136,482

Toledo Field Office $144,437 $182,736 -$38,299 1,154,856

New Orleans Field Office $1,476,389 $1,268,285 $208,104 72,482,289

League City Field Office $788,908 $444,041 $344,867 12,877,525

Export Hourly & Inspection Fees $24,324,832 $26,980,832 1

-$2,656,001 n/a

Non-Export Hourly & Inspection Fees2

$732,391 $1,640,630 -$908,239 n/a

Program Total $34,855,337 $37,814,930 -$2,959,593 n/a

1FY21 $2.471 million of obligations reimbursed with CARES Act funding.

2

Includes revenue and operating expenses for domestic field offices, scale testing programs, registration program, and 

Technology & Science Division.

Dated: 11/22/2021
FORMAL RECOMMENDATION BY THE

NATIONAL ORGANIC STANDARDS BOARD (NOSB) 

TO THE NATIONAL ORGANIC PROGRAM (NOP) 

Date: ___3/29/07_____

Subject: ___NOSB New Member Guide__

Chair: __Andrea Caroe__ 

 

Recommendation

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action: _______

Guidance Statement: ________ 

Other: __X___ 

Statement of the Recommendation (including Recount of Vote):

Accept the NOSB New Member Guide as an official NOSB document. 

NOSB Vote: Motion: R. Delgado Second: B. James 

Board vote: Yes - 13 No- 0 Abstain- 0 Absent - 2 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with OFPA and NOP):

The New Member Guide will assist incoming NOSB members in integrating faster and effectively 

as active participants in the functions of the Board.

Response by the NOP:
National Organic Standards Board 

Final Recommendation for 

Accepting the NOSB New Member Guide as an Official NOSB 

Document 

Date: 3/29/07 

I. List: (where in FR rule example 205.606) 

N/A 

II. Committee Summary: 

The proposed New Member Guide is considered an essential document in the orientation of 

incoming NOSB members. 

III. Board Recommendation 

To accept the NOSB New Member Guide as an official NOSB document. 

Board vote: 

Moved: R. Delgado Second: B. James 

Board vote: Yes- 13 No- 0 Absent- 2 Abstain-0 Recuse -0
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF JULY 31, 1999 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS AND RETAINED EARNINGS (ACCUMULATED DEFICIT) FOR THE YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                         360,769
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  190,321
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         393,134
<DEPRECIATION>                                 360,944
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,132,063
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      4,769,850
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,723,744
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,238,074)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,132,063
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               797,538
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,122,696
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               437,297
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             507,785
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,325,158)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,325,158)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 238,591
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,086,567)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (1.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.05)


</TABLE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 22

- 00086

- CV

Jonathan Jones , Appellant

v.

Laury Carson , Appellee

FROM THE 353RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY NO. D

- 1

- FM

- 17

- 004533 , THE HONORABLE MADELEINE CONNOR , JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief on appeal was originally due June 15, 2022 . On a ppellant ’ s

motion , the time for filing was extended to August 4, 2022

. Appellant has now filed a second

motion, requesting that the Court extend the time for filing app el lant’s brief. We grant the

motion for extension of time and order appellant to file a brief no later than Se ptember 19, 2 022

.
No further extension of time will be grante d and failure to comply with this order may result in

dismissal of this appeal. Se e T ex. R. App. P. 38.8(a).

It is ordered on August 25, 2022.

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly