alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A17E0046. THE STATE v. RONALD ARLINE.

The State of Georgia moves, pursuant to Court of Appeals Rule 40 (b), for an

emergency stay of all proceedings in the trial court pending resolution of its appeal

in this matter. Under our Rule 40 (b), this Court may exercise its inherent power as

may be necessary to preserve jurisdiction of an appeal or to prevent the contested

issue from becoming moot.

The State shows that Ronald Arline was found guilty by a Dougherty County

jury of rape, aggravated child molestation, and child molestation in 2014. The trial

court granted Arline’s motion for a new trial in an order filed March 13, 2017, and,

the State represents, it has filed a timely notice of appeal from that order.

The State contends that the trial court “demonstrated an intent to act beyond

its authority and jurisdiction” by considering the grant of bond to Arline. As of the

time of this emergency motion, the trial court has not ruled on the issue of Arline’s

bond. Thus, any decision by the trial court remains a matter of speculation. Further,

the State does not show that the trial court has no jurisdiction to consider the matter

of Arline’s bond. The State has not cited to any legal authority in support of its

motion, and, in particular, has failed to address OCGA § 5-7-5 (providing, in

applicable part, that “[i]n the event the state files an appeal as authorized in this

chapter, the accused shall be entitled to be released on reasonable bail pending the

disposition of the appeal, except in those cases punishable by death.”). Nor does the

State show why a stay of proceedingsis necessary to preserve thisCourt’sjurisdiction

over its appeal.

The State has not established that the requirements for a Rule 40 (b) motion

April 26, 2017
have been met. Accordingly, the State’s motion is DENIED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/26/2017
2013 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

8-15-2013 

# U S A v . C l a udi a M a r que z M or e no

P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : P r e c e de n t i al

D ock e t N o . 12-1460

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2013

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. I t h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2013 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al R e posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du

. R e c omme nde d C it a t ion

" U SA v . C l a ud i a M a r quez M or e no " (2013). 2013 D e cisio n s
. P a pe r 293. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2013/293

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

____________

No. 12

- 1460

_____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CLAUDIA LORENA MARQUEZ MORENO, Appellant

____________ On Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Island s (Division of St. Thomas) (D. C. No. 3

- 11

- cr - 00017

- 001) District Judge: Honorable Curtis V. Gomez Argued : December 3 , 2012 Before: SMITH, HARDIMAN, and ROTH, Circuit Judges

____________________ ORDER

________ ____________

The dissenting opinion filed on July 3, 2013 , is AMENDED as follows: The citation to “8 U.S.C. § 212 , ” which appears in the fifth paragraph of the dissenting opinion on page 3 , is amended to read “ 22 U.S.C. § 212 .” By the Court :
/s/ D. Brooks Smith U.S. Circuit Judge DATED: August 15, 2013
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 506 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 506

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide an additional tool to 
    prevent certain frauds against veterans, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Preventing Crimes Against Veterans 
Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL TOOL TO PREVENT CERTAIN FRAUDS AGAINST VETERANS.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 1352. Fraud regarding veterans' benefits
    ``(a) Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, any 
scheme or artifice to defraud an individual of veterans' benefits, or 
in connection with obtaining veteran's benefits for that individual, 
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or 
both.
    ``(b) In this section--
            ``(1) the term `veteran' has the meaning given that term in 
        section 101 of title 38; and
            ``(2) the term `veterans' benefits' means any benefit 
        provided by Federal law for a veteran or a dependent or 
        survivor of a veteran.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following new item:

``1352. Fraud regarding veterans' benefits.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 14, 2018.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
115th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 506

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide an additional tool to 
    prevent certain frauds against veterans, and for other purposes.
```
Exhibit 99.1

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

The undersigned hereby certifies,  in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  in his
capacity  as an officer of Emmis  Communications  Corporation  (the  "Company"),
that, to his knowledge:

(1)      the  Quarterly  Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended
         August 31, 2002,  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 such report fairly presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  October 14, 2002


                                            /s/ JEFFREY H. SMULYAN
                                            Jeffrey H. Smulyan
                                            Chairman of the Board, President and
                                            Chief Executive Officer



<PAGE>
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4980 

To prohibit the use of funds for certain parades. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 8, 2018 

Mr. VEASEY (for himself, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Ms. PLASKETT, Ms. LEE, Ms. 

JACKSON LEE, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Ms. NORTON, Mr. JOHNSON of 

Georgia, Mr. GARAMENDI, Mr. POLIS, Mr. BROWN of Maryland, Mr. 

MCGOVERN, Mr. SIRES, Mr. COHEN, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. 

PALLONE, Mr. RASKIN, and Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, 

and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 

for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 

for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 

committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of funds for certain parades. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Preventing Allocation 

5 of Resources for Absurd Defense Expenditures Act’’ or the 

6 ‘‘PARADE Act’’. 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4980 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CERTAIN PA2 RADES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—None of the funds appropriated 

4 or otherwise made available for the Department of De5 fense or for the White House or the Executive Office of 

6 the President may be used for a covered parade. 

7 (b) COVERED PARADE.—In this section, the term 

8 ‘‘covered parade’’ means a parade that— 

9 (1) is sponsored by the Department of Defense 

10 or by the White House or the Executive Office of the 

11 President; and 

12 (2) is not a parade that has been held to com13 memorate a holiday or special event during the ten14 year period preceding the date of the enactment of 

15 this Act. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>               5
<MULTIPLIER>            1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                           18,063
<SECURITIES>                     61,142
<RECEIVABLES>                    19,229
<ALLOWANCES>                        210
<INVENTORY>                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                101,111
<PP&E>                          143,764
<DEPRECIATION>                   28,648
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  218,339
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            40,739
<BONDS>                          14,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                          3,984
<OTHER-SE>                      158,483
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    218,339
<SALES>                         109,317
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                167,884
<CGS>                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    98,334
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                  1,794
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                2,733
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  73,961
<INCOME-TAX>                     29,611
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              44,350
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                     44,350
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      2.80
<EPS-DILUTED>                      2.80
        

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-40532

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ADAN GARCIA-FIGUEROA, also known as Adan Toro-Garcia

Defendant-Appellant

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:07-CR-46-1

Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgmentin a Criminal Case, Adan Garcia-Figueroa raises

arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.

224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and

not a separate criminal offense. UnitedStates v.Pineda-Arrellano, 492F.3d 624,

625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 3, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-20230

2

appellant's motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 12, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40607

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RAUL FAVELA-MASUCA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:05-CR-2287-ALL

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

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Raul Favela-Masuca appeals his conviction and sentence for

illegal reentry after having been deported, in violation of 8

U.S.C. § 1326. Favela-Masuca contends the district court erred

by applying an eight-level increase to his offense level,

pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C), because the conviction

that resulted in his deportation, misdemeanor serious domestic

abuse assault in violation of IOWA CODE ANN. §§ 236.2(2), 708.1 and

702.2A, is not a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16 and does
No. 06-40607

-2-

not constitute an aggravated felony under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(C).

In United States v. Villegas-Hernandez, 468 F.3d 874 (5th

Cir. 2006), cert. denied, ___ S. Ct. ___, No. 06-9050, 2007 WL

205014 (Feb. 20, 2007), this court determined that an offense is

a crime of violence under § 2L1.2 only if the use of force was

both intentional and an element of the offense. 

Villegas-Hernandez, 468 F.3d at 880-82. As the Government

concedes, the use of force is not an element of serious domestic

abuse assault under IOWA CODE ANN. §§ 236.2(2), 708.1 and 702.2A. 

The district court thus erred in applying an enhancement based on

this offense. Accordingly, the sentence is vacated, and this

matter remanded for resentencing in accordance with this opinion.

Favela-Masuca also challenges the constitutionality of the

treatment of prior felony and aggravated felony convictions under

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) as sentencing factors rather than elements of

the offense that must be found by a jury. Favela-Masuca’s

constitutional challenge is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v.

United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). Although he contends

that Almendarez-Torres was incorrectly decided and that a

majority of the Supreme Court would overrule Almendarez-Torres in

light of Apprendi, we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on

the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. See United

States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), cert.

denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Favela-Masuca properly concedes

that his argument is foreclosed in light of Almendarez-Torres and
No. 06-40607

-3-

circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for

further review. 

We deny as moot his motion to expedite the appeal.

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR

RESENTENCING; MOTION TO EXPEDITE THE APPEAL DENIED AS MOOT.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5014 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5014

 To provide for a moratorium on oil and gas leasing and exploration on 
 the outer Continental Shelf off the coast of Florida until 2029, and 
                          for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 14, 2018

Mr. Rutherford (for himself, Mr. Bilirakis, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. DeSantis, 
 Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Mast, Mr. Francis Rooney of Florida, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, 
   Mr. Ross, and Mr. Yoho) introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for a moratorium on oil and gas leasing and exploration on 
 the outer Continental Shelf off the coast of Florida until 2029, and 
                          for other purposes.

    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 ``Preserving Recreation, Oceans, 
Tourism, Environment, and Coastal Towns in Florida Act'' or the 
``PROTECT Florida Act''.

SEC. 2. MORATORIUM ON OIL AND GAS LEASING AND EXPLORATION ON THE OUTER 
              CONTINENTAL SHELF OFF COAST OF FLORIDA.

    (a) Extension of Gulf Coast Moratorium.--Section 104(a) of the Gulf 
of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006 (43 U.S.C. 1331 note) is 
amended--
            (1) by striking ``2022'' and inserting ``2029''; and
            (2) by inserting ``, and may not issue a permit for oil and 
        gas exploration (as such term is defined in section 2 of the 
        Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act) in'' after ``related 
        activity''.
    (b) Establishment of Atlantic Coast Moratorium.--Section 12 of the 
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1431) is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(g) Moratorium on Oil and Gas Leasing Off Coast of Florida.--
            ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may not offer for oil and 
        gas leasing, preleasing, or any related activity, and may not 
        issue a permit for oil and gas exploration in--
                    ``(A) any area in the Straits of Florida Planning 
                Area; and
                    ``(B) any area in the South Atlantic Planning Area 
                that is south of the northernmost lateral seaward 
                administrative boundary of the State of Florida.
            ``(2) Application.--This subsection shall apply during the 
        period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and 
        ending on June 30, 2029.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 E0 05 8 . VELAZ QUEZ v . PEREZ

.
Up o n co n si d erat i o n , ap p l i can t’ s em erg en cy m o t i o n fo r an ex t en s i o n o f t i m e in
wh i ch t o fi l e a d i s cret i o n ary ap p l i cat i o n i s GRANTED. Ap p l i can t s h al l h av e u n t i l
J u l y 1 , 2 0 2 2 t o fi l e t h e ap p l i cat i o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e is a tr u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## May 31, 2022

05/31/2022
Exhibit 10.2
  PROMISSORY NOTE
(DEED OF TRUST NOTE)
 $645,000.00
    
    Midland, Texas
    
    December 31, 2008
 PROPANE DIRECT ENTERPRISES, LLC, Borrower UNITED FUEL & ENERGY CORPORATION Lender SIX HUNDRED FORTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($645,000.00)
 London Interbank Offered Rate Index Interest Period Initial Interest Period
  1




---



##### 



Highest Lawful Rate
 inter alia Deed of Trust Loan Documents
  1. Initial Advance
   2




---



##### 



2. Representations and Warranties
 Existence and Authority
 Powers
 Financial Statements
 Liabilities Material Adverse Change
 Litigation
 Taxes GAAP
 Purpose of Loan
 3




---



##### 



ERISA ERISA
 Permits and Franchises, Etc
 Subsidiaries
 Hazardous Wastes and Substances Hazardous Materials
 Compliance with Laws
 General
 Public Utility Holding Company Act
 4




---



##### 



3. Affirmative Covenants
 Financial Statements and Other Information
   st th st th
     5




---



##### 



Taxes and Other Liens
 Discharge of Contractual Obligations
 Legal Status
 Indemnification Indemnitee Claims
 6




---



##### 



Curing of Defects
 Inspection and Appraisal
 Notices
 Compliance
  7




---



##### 



Compliance with Environmental Laws
 4. Negative Covenants
 Liens
      8




---



##### 



Indebtedness
 Citibank
Notes
  1,514,420.87 Note )
 ERISA Compliance
 Investments Investments
   9




---



##### 



Mergers, Consolidations
 Dividends and Distributions
 Transactions with Affiliates
 Accounting Method and Fiscal Year
 Nature of Business
 Membership Interests of Borrower
 Line of Business
 Debt Service Coverage Ratio EBITDA Debt Service
 10




---



##### 



Debt to EBITDA Ratio  Total Debt 
 Net Worth " Net Worth
 5. Events of Default Event of Default
 Failure to Pay.
 Breach of Agreements.
 Default under Other Indebtedness.
 Voluntary Bankruptcy or Insolvency Proceedings.
 11




---



##### 



Involuntary Bankruptcy or Insolvency Proceedings.
   12




---



##### 



6. Waiver of Jury; Binding Arbitration Claim
   7. Counterparts
 13




---



##### 



LENDER:
    
    BORROWER:UNITED FUEL & ENERGY CORPORATION,

a Texas corporation
    
    PROPANE DIRECT
ENTERPRISES, LLCBy:
    
    /s/ William C. Bousema
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Brock HardyPrinted Name: William C. Bousema
    
    Printed Name: Brock HardyTitle: EVP, CFO & Secretary
    
    Title: President
 14
---

---

Exhibit 10.3

Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by
reference in the following Registration Statements:

| | (1) | Registration
Statements (Form S-8 File No.333-12456) of Elbit Vision Systems           Ltd.and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | Registration
Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-114153) of Elbit Vision Systems Ltd;
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our report dated July 8, 2005,
with respect to the financial statements of Yuravision Co., Ltd., included in this Annual
Report (Form 20-F) of Elbit Vision Systems Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2004.

/s/ Ernst & Young Hang Young,
Seoul, Korea
July 14, 2005



---

---
Mr. Jonathan Blees

Assistant Chief Counsel 

### Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 November 18, 2005

California Energy Commission 1516 Ninth Street - Mail Station 14 Sacramento, CA 958 145512
Dear Mr. Blees: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has received the California Energy Commission's petition for exemption from federal preemption of California's water conservation standards for residential clothes washers, dated September 13, 2005. DOE has reviewed the petition, and determined that the regulatory requirements have not been met. The statement required by 10 C.F,R. 430.42(c), on whether "the same or related issue, act or transaction has been or presently is being considered or investigated by any State agency, department, or instrumentally," was not included in the petition. Please supply DOE with information in writing sufficient to satisfy this filing requirement and DOE will complete its review of your petition and provide you with the notification required under 10 C.F.R. 430.42(f). Sincerely,

cc: Charles A. Samuels, General Counsel Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky, and Popeo, PC

Printed with soy ink on recycled paper