alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-82,826-01

EX PARTE ERIC BIRDEN, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1129319-A IN THE 248 DISTRICT COURT th

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of

cocaine in an amount of less than one gram and sentenced to thirty days’ imprisonment. He did not 1

appeal his conviction. 

Applicant contends that his plea in this case was involuntary and his conviction violates due

process. Specifically, he contends that newly discovered laboratory analysis in this case reflects that

 The Applicant was convicted of a state jail felony and then punished within the range

1

for a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to TEX. PENAL CODE § 12.44(a).
2

he did not possess any cocaine. 

The State and the trial court agree that Applicant is entitled to relief. Applicant’s claim is

supported by the habeas record. Applicant is entitled to relief. Ex parte Mable, 443 S.W.3d 129

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). 

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 1129319 in the 248 District Court of Harris th

County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Harris County to

answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary bench

warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: March 4, 2015

Do not publish
32.1
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
   In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Commonwealth Income & Growth Fund
IV, (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Kimberly A. Springsteen-Abbott, Chief Executive Officer of the general
partner of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:
  (1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  (2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/
      Kimberly A. Springsteen-AbbottKimberly
      A. Springsteen-AbbottChief
      Executive OfficerMay
      15, 2009
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 124 (Friday, September 14, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1535]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           IN HONOR OF OHIO STATE REPRESENTATIVE MIKE DOVILLA

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, September 14, 2012

  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor State Representative 
Mike Dovilla of Ohio's 18th House District.
   In addition to being a State Representative, Mr. Dovilla is also a 
U.S. Navy veteran, small business owner, adjunct professor and 
nonprofit leader.
   Representative Dovilla is a Lieutenant in the U.S. Navy Reserves 
with over eight years of commissioned service, including a 12-month 
deployment to Iraq. While in Iraq, he served as Deputy Officer-in-
Charge leading a 25-person Baghdad-based intelligence headquarters 
which acted as a counter-improvised explosive device brigade. His 
reserve assignments have included a position with the Chief Naval 
Operations and the Office of Naval Intelligence. He is currently 
serving with a U.S. Forces, Japan reserve unit in Akron, Ohio. His 
military awards include the Defense Meritorious Service Medal, the Navy 
and Marine Corps Achievement Medal, and the Army Achievement Medal.
   Outside of the military, Representative Dovilla has served as a 
Presidential appointee at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management; a 
senior advisor to former U.S. Senator, George Voinovich; a Presidential 
Management Fellow at the U.S. Department of State; a manager of The 
Dovilla Group--his strategic consulting firm; a German Marshall Fund of 
the United States' American Marshall Memorial Fellow; a volunteer at 
University Hospitals Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital; and a 
member of the Kiwanis Club of Berea, American Legion Post 91 in Berea, 
and Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 3445 of Strongsville. He was elected 
to the Ohio General Assembly in 2010 where he is currently serving his 
first term.
   Mr. Speaker and colleagues, please join me in honoring the 
achievements of State Representative Mike Dovilla.

                          ____________________
```
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. R OSEM AR

Y FIERR OS, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 13-10290

D.C . No. 1:11-c r-00274-LJO M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of C a lifornia Lawre nc e J. O’ Ne ill, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d

Nove m b e r 18, 2014 ** B e fore : LEAVY, FISHER , a nd N.R . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. R ose m ary Fie rros a ppe a ls from the distric t

c o urt’ s judgm e nt a

nd c ha lle nge s the 4 8-m o nth se nte nc e im p ose d following her jury -tria l c onvic tion for c onspira c y to unla wfully produc e an d tra

nsfe r ide ntific ation doc um e nts, in viola tion of 18 U.S.C . § 371; 15 c ounts of unla wful produc tion of a

n ide ntific ation doc um e nt a nd 

# FIL ED NOV 24 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).a iding a

nd a b e tting, in viola

tion of 18 U.S.C . §§ 2 a

nd 1028(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(ii), (b)(1)(B ); a

nd 15 c ounts of unla

wful tra nsfe r of an ide ntific ation doc um e nt a nd a iding a nd a b e tting, in viola

tion of 18 U.S.C . §§ 2 a

nd 1028(a)(2), (b)(1)(A)(ii), (b)(1)(B ). W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a nd we a ffirm . Fie rros c onte n ds tha

t the distric t c ourt e rre d by fa iling to e xpla in the e xte nt of its upwa

rd va rianc e from

the a dvisory

Se nte nc ing Guide line s ra nge . The c ourt sta te d tha t it wa s a dopting the

probation offic e r’ s se nte nc ing re c o m m e ndat ion of 48 m onths in light of the

se riousne ss of the c rim e an d the ne e d to de te r and to provide just punishm

e nt for the offe nse . This e xpla nat ion wa s suffic ie nt. Se e Unite d State s v . C arty , 520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th C ir. 2008) (e n ba n c ). Fie rros a lso c onte nds tha

t the distric t c ourt im

pose d a substa ntive ly unre a s ona

ble se nte nc e be c a

u s e she re c e ive d a

se nte nc e 30 m onths longer tha n he r c o-de fe nda

nt, c re ating a

n unwa rrante d se nte nc ing dispa

rity . The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in im

p o sing Fie rros’ s se nte nc e . Se eGall v . Unite d State s , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The a bove -Guide line s se nte nc e is substa ntive ly re a s ona ble in light of the

18 U.S.C . § 3553(a) se nte nc ing fa c tors a nd the tota lity

of the c irc um s ta

nc e s, inc luding Fie rros’ s le a de rship rolein the c onspira c y . S e eid. ; Unite d State s v . Espinoza-Baza , 647 F.3d 1182, 1195 (9th C ir. 2011). AFFIRM E D.
1 3 - 1 0 2 9 0 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DECEMBER
26, 1998 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-26-1998
<CASH>                                              65
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   97,319
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,393
<INVENTORY>                                    103,716
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               209,467
<PP&E>                                          79,144
<DEPRECIATION>                                  33,314
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 292,183
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           74,122
<BONDS>                                        100,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            82
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   292,183
<SALES>                                        910,272
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               910,272
<CGS>                                          694,800
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  694,800
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               191,201
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,915
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,632
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (276)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       689
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (965)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (965)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.12)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 121 (Tuesday, September 11, 2012)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1472-E1473]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                     REMEMBERING SEPTEMBER 11, 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. PHIL GINGREY

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 11, 2012

  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in memory of the 
nearly three thousand lives lost in the attacks of September 11th. On 
Patriots Day, we also honor the servicemen and women who have paid the 
ultimate price in the war on terror. We will never be able to fully 
honor their sacrifice in the defense of our freedoms.
  In the 11 years since the devastation of that day, our anger and 
sadness have turned to unfaltering resolve and determination. On that 
terrible day, 19 terrorists believed they would bring America to its 
knees. They believed our Nation and our people could be defeated by a 
cowardly attack. They were wrong.

[[Page E1473]]

  Today, America is a brighter beacon of freedom than she ever has 
been. We remain a nation inspired by the sacrifices of those before us 
and committed to the ideals they fought so dearly to protect. Mr. 
Speaker, we will never forget the loved ones and the heroes lost on 
that day.

                          ____________________
```
**Exhibit 21**

 

Subsidiariesof Registrant

 

The followingsubsidiaries are direct or indirect subsidiaries of the Company:

 

AffinityAdvertising, LP, a Minnesota limited partnership

Affinity Brokerage, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

Affinity Guest Services, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

Affinity Road and TravelClub, Inc., a Texas corporation

AGI Productions, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

ARU, Inc., aMinnesota corporation

Camp Coast to Coast, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

Camping Realty, Inc.,a Kentucky corporation

Camping World CardServices, Inc., an Ohio corporation

Camping World, Inc.,a Kentucky corporation

Camping World InsuranceServices of Kentucky, Inc., a Kentucky corporation

Camping World InsuranceServices of Nevada, Inc., a Nevada corporation

Camping World InsuranceServices of Texas, Inc., a Texas corporation

Coast Marketing Group, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

CWFR Capital Corp., aDelaware corporation

CWI, Inc., aKentucky corporation

CW Michigan, Inc., aDelaware corporation

Ehlert Publishing Group, Inc.,a Minnesota corporation

Golf Card InternationalCorp., a Delaware corporation

Golf Card Resort Services, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

GSS Enterprises, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

PowerSports Media, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

TL Enterprises, Inc.,a Delaware corporation

VBI Inc., a Delawarecorporation

 

----
#### Samuel W. PINKERTON et al., Petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 11484.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Aug. 1, 1939.

A. W. Clapp, Charles W. Briggs, and Wayne C. Gilbert, all of St. Paul, Minn., for petitioners.

James W. Morris, Asst. Atty. Gen., Sewall Key, Sp. Asst, to Atty. Gen., and J. P. Wenchel, Chief Counsel, Bureau of Internal Revenue, and C. E. Lowery, Sp. Atty., Bureau of Internal Revenue, both of Washington, D. C., for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Cause remanded to Board of Tax Appeals for further proceedings, per stipulation of party.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350**

 

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C.1350, I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Liquidmetal Technologies(the “Company”), hereby certifies, based on my knowledge, that the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q/A (Amendment No. 2) of the Company for the quarter endedSeptember 30, 2005, (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Ricardo  A. Salas                                    |   |
|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Ricardo A.  Salas, President and Chief Executive Officer |
| July 20,  2006                                           |

 

----
COMPANY SANITIZED. DOES NOT CONTAIN TSCA CBI2010/15 PFOA Global Stewardship ProgramCompany Report: Summary of Annual Emissions and Product ContentSECTION 1: REPORT DATESeptember 2011SECTION 2: COMPANY IDENTIFICATIONCompany NameArkema Inc.2aStreet Address900 1stAvenueKing of Prussia, PA 19406SECTION 3: SUMMARY OF EMISSIONSReporting Period (use calendar year - e.g. Jan 1, 2000 to Dec 31, 2000) Jan 1, 2010 to Dec 31, 2010Releases to all environmental media fromfluoropolymer and telomer manufactureOperationsChemical categorykgs1mersfluoropolyofkgscategoryofkgstelomersofkgscategoryofkgsPFOA, PFOA salts andhigher homologues> 1,000 – 5,000 > 0.0001 – 0.001NA3aU.S. facilitiesPrecursorsNA NANAPFOA, PFOA salts andhigher homologues> 1,000 – 5,000 > 0.001 – 0.01NA3bNon-U.S. facilitiesPrecursorsNA NANAPlease provide information on the methods, assumptions, uncertainties and detection limits for the data provided above.3cFor each chemical category, the quantity of chemical released was determined for each process using mass balances, engineering calculations,and actual measurements of the chemical. The total quantity released is the sum of releases from thedifferent processes. The margin oferror for the total quantity released for all of the chemical categories is approximately +/- 5%.COMPANY SANITIZED. DOES NOT CONTAIN TSCA CBISECTION 4: SUMMARY OF PRODUCT CONTENTReporting Period (use calendar year - e.g. Jan 1, 2000 to Dec 31, 2000)Jan 1, 2010 to Dec 31, 2010Product typeFluoropolymer dispersionsOther fluoropolymers1Telomer based products4aProduction volume (kgs/year)2> 100,000 kgs – 1,000,000 kgsOver 1,000,000 kgsNAConcentration3OperationsChemical categoryFluoropolymer dispersions4(ppm wet-weight)Other fluoropolymers1,5(ppb dry-weight)Telomer based products6(ppb dry-weight)PFOA, PFOA saltsand higherhomologues0 PPM> 5,000 ppb - 25,000 ppbNA4bU.S.facilitiesPrecursorsNA NANAPFOA, PFOA saltsand higherhomologuesNA> 50,000 ppb - 100,000 ppbNA4cNon-U.S.facilitiesPrecursorsNA NANA4dPlease provide information on the methods, assumptions, uncertainties and detection limits for the data provided above.1Fluoropolymers manufactured with PFOA or related chemicals.2Use the following ranges: (1) Zero (2) > 0 – 10kgs; (3) > 10 kgs – 100 kgs; (4) > 100 kgs – 1,000 kgs; (5) > 1,000 kgs – 10,000 kgs; (6) > 10,000kgs –100,000 kgs; (7) > 100,000 kgs – 1,000,000 kgs; (8) Over 1,000,000 kgs.3Concentration should reflect the concentration ofchemical in the product as sold by the reporting company. If the reporting company has informationconcerning the concentration of chemical in the product as used by others – for example, as incorporated by dilution into a formulation – that additionalinformation would also be helpful.4This value should be expressed as a weighted average concentration and range.5This value should be expressed as a maximum concentration.6This value should be expressed as a simple (not weighted) average and range.
#### Aetna Casualty & Surety et al., Appellants, v Ohio Insurance Guaranty Association, as Agent for Carriers Insurance Company, et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: The court properly declared the rights and obligations of the parties by adopting defendant Ohio Insurance Guaranty Association’s (OIGA’s) interpretation of its governing statute (Ohio Rev Code Annot § 3955.01 *et seq.).*Under that statute, OIGA *622does not stand in the shoes of the insolvent insurer for all purposes, but is obligated to indemnify only the insured of the insolvent insurer and those possessing "covered claims”, defined as those claims against the insured of the insolvent insurer that come within the ambit of an insurance policy issued by the insolvent insurer *(see,*Ohio Rev Code Annot § 3955.01 [B]; § 3955.08 [A] [1], [2]). OIGA’s obligation to indemnify Signs or Compass for Signs’ "covered claim” against Compass is, nevertheless, circumscribed by various sections of the Act. In no event would OIGA be obligated to pay more than $300,000 on behalf of the insured *(see,*Ohio Rev Code Annot § 3955.01 [B] [1]) or to pay more than the coverage limits of the policy issued to the insured by the insolvent insurer *(see,*Ohio Rev Code Annot § 3955.08 [A] [1]). Moreover, OIGA’s obligation to indemnify does not extend to any portion of the covered claim that is covered by other insurance *(see,*Ohio Rev Code Annot § 3955.01 [B] [2]; § 3955.13). The other insurance that Signs is required to exhaust includes not only the decedent’s uninsured motorist coverage and other insurance held by Compass, but also policies of insurance covering other tort-feasors, including F & R’s policy with Aetna and Huston’s policy with Dairyland (assuming such coverage is available). Finally, to the extent that Signs recovers against Huston or F & R and those judgments are paid by Dairyland or Aetna, neither insurer may maintain a subrogation claim against either Compass or OIGA *(see,*Ohio Rev Code Annot § 3955.01 [B] [2]). The court’s declarations are in accordance with the foregoing provisions of the Code and with its purpose to create a limited fund for the protection of the insureds of insolvent insurers and claimants against those insureds, but not to protect other insurers. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Joslin, J. — Declaratory Judgment.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Denman, Green and Lowery, JJ.
# C_2013313EN.01001802.xml

| 26.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/18

---

Judgment of the General Court of 13 September 2013 — Total Raffinage Marketing v Commission

(Case T-566/08) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Paraffin waxes market - Slack wax market - Decision finding an infringement of Article 81 EC - Price-fixing and market-sharing - Proof of the existence of the cartel - Concept of a single and continuous infringement - Duration of the infringement - Interruption of the infringement - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Equal treatment - Presumption of innocence - Attributability of the unlawful conduct - Liability of a parent company for infringements of the competition rules committed by its subsidiaries - Decisive influence exercised by the parent company - Presumption where the parent company holds 100 % of the shares - Proportionality - Rounding method - Unlimited jurisdiction)

2013/C 313/33

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Total Raffinage Marketing (Puteaux, France) (represented by: A. Vandencasteele, C. Falmagne, C. Lemaire and S. Naudin, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre and A. Biolan, acting as Agents, and by N. Coutrelis, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Primarily, application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2008) 5476 final of 1 October 2008, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.181 — Candle waxes), and, in the alternative, application for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Orders the fine imposed on Total Raffinage Marketing in Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2008) 5476 final of 1 October 2008, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.181 — Candle waxes) to be set at EUR 125 459 842; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Orders the fine imposed on Total Raffinage Marketing in Article 2 of Commission Decision C(2008) 5476 final of 1 October 2008, relating to a proceeding under Article 81 [EC] and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.181 — Candle waxes) to be set at EUR 125 459 842;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders Total Raffinage Marketing to bear nine-tenths of its own costs and to pay nine-tenths of the costs of the European Commission. The European Commission is to bear one-tenth of its own costs and to pay one-tenth of the costs incurred by Total Raffinage Marketing. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders Total Raffinage Marketing to bear nine-tenths of its own costs and to pay nine-tenths of the costs of the European Commission. The European Commission is to bear one-tenth of its own costs and to pay one-tenth of the costs incurred by Total Raffinage Marketing.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.

1

---