alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Erwin BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 30272.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 11, 1959.

James B. Turner, W. E. Martin, Houston, for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Thomas D. White and David A. Gibson, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted under Art. 527, Vernon’s Ann.P.C., of the offense of engaging in the showing and exhibition of lewd and lascivious motion pictures entitled “Eiffel” and his punishment assessed at 45 days in jail and a fine of $500.

The sufficiency of the evidence in the record before this court to sustain the conviction is challenged.

The statement of facts fails to contain any evidence showing that the motion pictures entitled “Eiffel,” on which the state relies for a conviction, were lewd and lascivious. The testimony reveals that said pictures were shown to the jury during the trial. However, none of the pictures are brought forward in the record and there is no testimony describing what they showed or portrayed.

The evidence is insufficient to support the conviction. Campbell v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 172, 297 S.W.2d 847.

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 33-59918, 33-59916, 33-59920, 33-91900, 33-92684, 333-19487 and
333-26565) pertaining to the Davstar Industries Ltd. Stock Option Plan, 1992
Employee Stock Option Plan, the Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan, the
Davstar Industries, Ltd. 1994 Stock Incentive Plan, Dacomed 1989 Stock Option
Plan, 1996 Directors Non-Qualified Stock Incentive Plan, Employee Stock Purchase
Plan, Advanced Surgical 1992 Stock Plan and Employee Reserved Stock Agreements,
the X-Cardia 1996 Stock Option Plan and the Microsurge, Inc. Stock Option Plan
of Urohealth Systems, Inc. of our report dated May 9, 1997 included in Urohealth
Systems, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K on our audits of the financial
statements of Microsurge, Inc. as of March 31, 1997 and 1996 and for the year
ended March 31, 1997, the nine months ended March 31, 1996 and the year ended
December 31, 1995 (not separately included therein).
 
                                             /s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
 
Boston, Massachusetts
July 11, 1997
Blueprint





Exhibit
4.2










 



CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT



OF THE



CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES AND RIGHTS OF
THE



SERIES E CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK OF



ADVANCED ENVIRONMENTAL RECYCLING TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


 


March
16, 2017


 


Advanced
Environmental Recycling Technologies, Inc., a corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware (the
“Corporation”),
hereby executes and adopts the following Certificate of Amendment
of the Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of the Corporation and does
hereby certify as follows:


 



FIRST: 

The name of the
Corporation is Advanced Environmental Recycling Technologies, Inc.,
the date of filing of its original Certificate of Incorporation
with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware was December
2, 1988, and the date of filing of its original Certificate of
Designations, Preferences and Rights of the Series E Convertible
Preferred Stock with the Secretary of State of the State of
Delaware was March 17, 2011.






 



SECOND: 

Section 8 of the
Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the Series E
Convertible Preferred Stock is amended by adding the following as a
new subsection (d):






 


“In the event
of a Fundamental Transaction occurring prior to August 1, 2017, for
the purposes of determining the amount to which each Holder of
Series E Preferred Stock is entitled pursuant to Section 8(a),
“Conversion Rate” shall mean
19,152.27.”


 



THIRD: 

The foregoing
amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Section 242(b) of the General Corporation Law of the
State of Delaware, Article Fourth of the Certificate of
Incorporation of the Corporation, as amended, and Section 21(b) of
the Certificate of Designations, Preferences and Rights of the
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock of the
Corporation.






 



FOURTH: 

The effective time
of the amendment herein certified shall be the date of
filing.








 








 






IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has
executed this amendment of the Certificate of Designations,
Preferences and Rights of the Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
of the Corporation as of the date first written above.


 


Advanced
Environmental Recycling Technologies, Inc.


 



By: /s/ Timothy Morrison    
                 
       









Name:
Timothy Morrison


Title:
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 (Signature
Page to Certificate of Amendment)
Exhibit 32.2

Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. 1350, I, the undersigned
Principal Financial Officer of McKenzie Bay International, Ltd.  (the
"Company"),  hereby certify, based on  my  knowledge,  that  the Quarterly
Report  on Form 10-QSB of the Company  for  the  quarter ended  March 31,
2005  (the "Report") fully complies  with  the requirements of Section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act  of 1934   and  that  information  contained  in
the  Report  fairly presents,  in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.

Date: May 23, 2005

/s/ Gregory N. Bakeman
----------------------
Gregory N. Bakeman
Principal Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 6, 2021

No. 04-19-00318-CV

Leticia R. BENAVIDES,

Appellant

v.

Cristina B. ALEXANDER as permanent guardian of the person of Carlos Y. Benavides, Jr., et 

al.,

Appellees

From the 49th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CVQ-000161-D1

Honorable Jose A. Lopez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

This appeal was originally set for formal submission and oral argument on 

September 23, 2021 at 2:00 P.M. before a panel consisting of Chief Justice 

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, and Justice Beth Watkins. On its 

own motion, the panel WITHDRAWS this submission date and ORDERS this 

cause set for formal submission and oral argument before this court on September 

16, 2021 at 2:00 P.M., before a panel consisting of Chief Justice Rebeca C. 

Martinez, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, and Justice Beth Watkins.

 In accordance with the Texas Supreme Court’s emergency orders in 

response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the oral argument will be held through the 

Fourth Court of Appeals’ Zoom license.

 Counsel will receive a separate e-mail that will contain a link for the oral 

argument. Counsel are admonished as follows: 
 1. The link to Zoom is only for counsel presenting argument and is not to 

be shared with any other person. Counsel will need a computer or other 

electronic device with a camera, a microphone, and access to the Internet. If 

counsel intends to present any exhibits during oral argument, any such exhibits 

must be electronically filed by noon on the day before argument.

2. The argument will be live streamed to the Court’s YouTube channel for 

the benefit of the public. The argument can be accessed using the following link:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCiaWJQ7eW5OQIALdyLN6s

3A

3. Counsel are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the Zoom 

platform. The Clerk of the Court will contact counsel no later than the week 

before argument to verify connectivity and equipment.

 4. Counsel must wear court-appropriate attire and choose an appropriate 

background.

 The time for oral argument will be limited to twenty minutes for 

appellant’s opening argument, twenty minutes for appellee’s argument, and ten 

minutes for appellant’s rebuttal argument. If any participant’s link is 

disconnected during argument, timing of the argument will stop until the 

participant is able to reconnect.

 If either party no longer wishes to present argument, the party must notify 

this court in writing within seven days of receiving this notice.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

 CLERK OF COURT
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.22
SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT


THIS    SECOND    AMENDMENT TO    LEASE    AGREEMENT    (this    "Second
Amendment") is entered into effective November 26, 2013, by and between Greenhouse Office Investors I, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Landlord”), and URS Corporation, a Nevada corporation ("Tenant”).


WITNESSETH


WHEREAS, pursuant to that certain Office Lease dated as of May 23, 2013 as amended by First Amendment thereto dated September 13, 2013 (together the "Lease"), Landlord leased to Tenant a total of 136,358 Rentable Square Feet ("RSF”) in the building located at 18918 Katy Freeway, Harris County, Texas (the "Building"), of  which approximately  126,795 RSF is located on Floors 3, 4 and 5  of
the Building and approximately 9,563 RSF is located on the first Floor of the Building, all as is more fully described in Lease (the "Premises"); and


WHEREAS, Landlord and Tenant desire to amend the Lease in certain respects as hereinafter set forth;


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Landlord and Tenant hereby amend the Lease as follows, effective as of the date first set forth above:


1.Modification of Basic Lease Information. The first and second lines of Section I.A of the Lease are hereby amended to change the address and location of the Building to 19219 Katy Freeway, Harris County, Houston, Texas 77094.


		
	2.
	Miscellaneous.




(a)Conflicts; Ratification. In the event of any conflict between the terms of this Second Amendment and the terms of the Lease, the terms of this Second Amendment shall control. The Lease, as amended by this Second Amendment, is hereby ratified and affirmed.


(b)Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, and each counterpart when fully executed and delivered shall constitute an original instrument, and all such multiple counterparts shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Emailed and/or faxed counterparts and/or signatures are acceptable.


(c)Entire Agreement. The Lease, as amended by this Second Amendment sets forth all covenants, agreements and understandings between Landlord and Tenant with respect to the subject matter hereof.


(d)Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the respective definitions provided in the Lease.






[Signature  page to follow]




1








Executed as of the date first set forth above.




LANDLORD:


GREENHOUSE OFFICE INVESTORS I, LLC
a Delaware limited liability company




By:    /s/ Preston Young            
Name:    Preston Young            
Title:     Authorized Signatory        




TENANT:


URS CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation




By:    /s/ Leisa Nelson            
Name:    Leisa Nelson            
Title:     Vice President            








2
#### Laron A. MINGO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 02-5099.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 18, 2002.

ORDER

The appellant having failed to pay the docketing fee required by Federal Circuit Rule 52(a)(1) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
Exhibit 99(a)

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

     In connection with the Form 10-KSB of IBW Financial Corporation for the
year ended December 31, 2002, I, B. Doyle Mitchell, Jr., President and Chief
Executive Officer of IBW Financial Corporation, hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

(1) such Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 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 Form 10-KSB for the year ended December
31, 2002, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of IBW Financial Corporation.



/s/ B. Doyle Mitchell, Jr.
-----------------------------------------
B. Doyle Mitchell, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
#### Bill CAUBLE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 37752.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 17, 1965.

Joe R. Carroll, (on appeal only), Snyder, for appellant.

Wayland G. Holt, Dist. Atty., Snyder, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

The conviction is for forgery with two prior convictions for forgery alleged for enhancement; the punishment, life.

Edwin Isabell, while testifying, identified the appellant as being the same person who passed a check to him on May 10, 1964, in the sum of $25, payable to Billy Cauble, *805signed Mrs. W. H. Cauble, as maker, endorsed by Billy Cauble, and drawn on the Snyder National Bank. The witness Isa-bell identified á check at the trial as the same check passed to him by the appellant, who endorsed it in his presence, and for which he gave the appellant $23 in money and gasoline of the value of $2. Said check was then introduced in evidence.

Mrs. W. H. Cauble testified that she did not sign or authorize anyone to sign her name to said check.

Proof was introduced of the prior forgery convictions as alleged and of the identity of the appellant as the same person convicted therefor.

The appellant did not testify but called D. W. Hargrove, the owner of the service station where the appellant passed to Isa-bell the $25 check while Hargrove was absent. Hargrove testified that on May 9, the appellant passed to him a check drawn the same as the $25 check except it was for $15; that appellant never wrote out the check but only endorsed it in his presence; and that the appellant told him he would pay the checks when he got out of jail but after he got out he never did. The $15 check was introduced in evidence,

Appellant insists that the evidence wholly fails to prove that the appellant did, in fact, make the $25 check upon which the state relied for a conviction. He urges that the state proved only that Mrs. W. H. Cauble did not sign or authorize anyone to sign her name to the check, and that the check was passed to Edwin Isabell by Bill Cauble.

The $25 and $15 checks were the only checks introduced in evidence.

On re-cross examination of Hazel Bing-ham, appellant’s sister, she testified in part as follows:

> “Q: Do you recognize the handwriting on this check?

> “A: That is Billy Cauble’s handwriting.”

If it was the $15 check that Hazel Bing-ham testified was in appellant’s handwriting instead of the $25 check, then the $15 check was before the jury as being in the handwriting of the appellant. Both Hargrove and Isabell testified that the appellant endorsed the two checks, respectively, in their presence. Hence the endorsements were known specimens of appellant’s handwriting.

The appellant did not invoke the provisions of Art. 731, C.C.P., by denying under oath the making of the $25 check.

The possession of the check by the appellant and its endorsement in person by him, with the later promise to the holder to pay it, in connection with the known speci-, mens of his. handwriting on the checks, was sufficient to warrant the conviction and supports the jury’s verdict.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report on Form10-KSB of FP Technology, Inc. (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended June30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, herebycertifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.                             the Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                             theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company at the datesand for the period indicated.

This Certificate has not been, and shall notbe deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
| Dated:  September 28, 2006 | By:    | /s/    | Stephen Peary           |   |
|----------------------------|--------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                       |   |   | Stephen Peary           |
|                       |   |   | Chief Financial Officer |
|                            |        |        |                         |        |  |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           8,399
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,990
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,650
<INVENTORY>                                     12,024
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                27,461
<PP&E>                                          20,507
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,585
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  41,744
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,689
<BONDS>                                         37,716
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,666
<COMMON>                                        61,946
<OTHER-SE>                                     (80,398)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    41,744
<SALES>                                         22,281
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                22,281
<CGS>                                           24,062
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   54,290
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    18
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,261
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (37,670)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (37,670)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (37,670)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (2.75)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.75)
        

</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 28, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 130436 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 130436 COA: 255435 Oakland CC: 2000-021362-CZ HUGH P. CARSON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 1, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0424 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2006

Clerk
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

              Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-11139) pertaining to the Boston Communications Group, Inc.
1996 Stock Option Plan, (Form S-8 Nos. 333-11191) pertaining to the Boston
Communications Group, Inc. Non-Qualified Stock Options Pursuant to Written
Option Agreements, (Form S-8 No. 333-11195) pertaining to the Boston
Communications Group, Inc. 1996 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, (Form S-8 No. 333-
57643) pertaining to the Boston Communications Group, Inc.1998 Stock Incentive
Plan and (Form S-8 No. 333-57641) pertaining to the Boston Communications Group,
Inc. Non-Statutory Stock Option of our report dated January 29, 1999, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Boston
Communications Group, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1998.

                                                      /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Boston, Massachusetts
March 29, 1999
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as principal accounting officer of SMTC Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that to the undersigned’s knowledge:



1) the Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 29, 2013 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 Company’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 29, 2013 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



| | /s/ Clarke H. Bailey                                | 
| | --------------------------------------------------- | 
| | Clarke H. Bailey                                    | 
| | Executive Chairman and Principal Accounting Officer | 



Date: November 13, 2013



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to SMTC Corporation and will be retained by SMTC Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.