alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 April 3, 2015

t0331

Order 

Clerk

April 3, 2015

150728

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 150728

COA: 315983 

Muskegon CC: 12-062643-FH

MAURICE DANTE HENDERSON,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 6, 2014 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in 

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REVERSE that part of the Court of Appeals 

judgment holding that the May 3, 2012 letter from the Michigan Department of 

Corrections to the prosecutor was sufficient to trigger start of the 180-day period set forth 

in MCL 780.131. At the time that letter was sent, the Department did not have notice of 

any pending untried warrant, indictment, information, or complaint against the defendant, 

and the letter therefore did not meet the statutory requirements for applying the 180-day 

rule. We REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the Muskegon 

Circuit Court’s finding of a second 180-day rule violation that the Court of Appeals 

declined to address.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1740 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1740

   To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate a segment of 
   Illabot Creek in Skagit County, Washington, as a component of the 
                National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 5, 2011

   Mr. Larsen of Washington introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate a segment of 
   Illabot Creek in Skagit County, Washington, as a component of the 
                National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF WILD AND SCENIC RIVER SEGMENTS.

    Section 3(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16 U.S.C. 1274(a)) 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(__) Illabot creek, washington.--
                    ``(A) The 14.3-mile segment from the headwaters of 
                Illabot Creek to the northern terminus as generally 
                depicted on the map titled `Illabot Creek Proposed WSR-
                Northern Terminus', dated September 15, 2009, to be 
                administered by the Secretary of Agriculture as 
                follows:
                            ``(i) The 4.3-mile segment from the 
                        headwaters of Illabot Creek to the boundary of 
                        Glacier Peak Wilderness Area as a wild river.
                            ``(ii) The 10-mile segment from the 
                        boundary of Glacier Peak Wilderness to the 
                        northern terminus as generally depicted on the 
                        map titled `Illabot Creek Proposed WSR-Northern 
                        Terminus', dated September 15, 2009, as a 
                        recreational river.
                    ``(B) Action required to be taken under subsection 
                (d)(1) for the river segments designated under this 
                paragraph shall be completed through revision of the 
                Skagit Wild and Scenic River comprehensive management 
                plan.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION 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  VerticalBuyer,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2001 as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Timothy  Rosen,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  section  1350,  as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act  of  2002,  that;

     (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  result of operations of the
Company.

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

Date:  July 2, 2004

                                                /s/ Timothy  Rosen
                                                -------------------------
                                                Timothy  Rosen
                                                Chief  Executive  Officer


                                       10
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION1

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), and Section 1350 of
Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. § 1350), Robert G. Johnson, Jr., M.D., Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated (the Company), and Gary S. Titus, Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the
Exchange Act, and

2. The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

In Witness Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of November 9,
2006.



/s/ Robert G. Johnson, Jr.Robert G. Johnson, Jr., M.D., Ph.D.President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ Gary S. TitusGary S. TitusSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer




---

|1 | This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.
|- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Kosan Biosciences Incorporated and will be retained by Kosan Biosciences Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Floyd DRAKE v. STATE.

No. 29055.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 8, 1957.

No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The conviction is for robbery with firearms ; the punishment, 25 years in the penitentiary.

Accompanying the record is appellant’s affidavit to dismiss the appeal.

Accordingly, the request is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1592 

To limit United States assistance to the Palestinian Authority if the 

Palestinian Authority unilaterally declares a Palestinian state. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 15, 2011 

Ms. BERKLEY (for herself and Mr. ENGEL) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To limit United States assistance to the Palestinian Authority if the Palestinian Authority unilaterally declares a 

Palestinian state. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE 

4 TO PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY. 

5 No funds made available for assistance to the Pales6 tinian Authority may be obligated or expended if the 

7 President determines and certifies to Congress that the 

8 Palestinian Authority has unilaterally declared a Pales9 tinian state. 

Æ 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
#### Mrs. Alfredo ALBIDREZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28994.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 1, 1957.

*661No attorney for appellant of record on appeal.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

The conviction is for the unlawful possession of beer for the purpose of sale in a dry area with a prior conviction alleged to enhance the penalty; the punishment, 10 days in jail and a fine of $300.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
                                       OF
                            PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
                                   PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with Catuity,
Inc. (the "Company") Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the "Report") for the
purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14b or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of
Title 18 of the United States Code.

Alfred H. Racine III, the President and Chief Executive Officer, and John H.
Lowry, the Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, each certifies that, to the
best of his knowledge:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




Date: May 16, 2005

                                        /s/ Alfred H. Racine III
                                        ------------------------
                                        Alfred H. Racine III
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer



                                        /s/ John H. Lowry
                                        -----------------
                                        John H. Lowry
                                        Chief Financial Officer



Note: A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00270-CR

Ex parte Humberto Sanchez Bernal

FROM THE 147TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. D-1-DC-98-981216-A, THE HONORABLE CLIFFORD A. BROWN, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 

Appellant Humberto Sanchez Bernal has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal. 

The motion is signed by both appellant and his attorney. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a). We grant 

the motion and dismiss the appeal. See id.

__________________________________________

Cindy Olson Bourland, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Goodwin, and Bourland

Dismissed on Agreed Motion

Filed: November 16, 2018

Do Not Publish
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1592 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1592

 To limit United States assistance to the Palestinian Authority if the 
    Palestinian Authority unilaterally declares a Palestinian state.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2011

Ms. Berkley (for herself and Mr. Engel) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To limit United States assistance to the Palestinian Authority if the 
    Palestinian Authority unilaterally declares a Palestinian state.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE TO PALESTINIAN 
              AUTHORITY.

    No funds made available for assistance to the Palestinian Authority 
may be obligated or expended if the President determines and certifies 
to Congress that the Palestinian Authority has unilaterally declared a 
Palestinian state.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-40456 Conference Calendar

MARCOS ORTIZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus DONNA BROWN; MARIA L. MERCADO, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:02-CV-361

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Marcos Ortiz (Ortiz), Texas prisoner # 1049113, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. Ortiz was convicted of aggravated robbery and aggravated assault. He filed his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against his court-appointed attorney and investigator in that criminal proceeding. Ortiz argues that his attorney and investigator conspired to deny him due process and deprive him of equal protection by failing to investigate his case. He contends United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D August 18, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 04-40456 -2- that an investigation of the case would have shown that the charges against him were fabricated. Ortiz’s allegations are ones alleging “harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render a conviction or sentence invalid.” See Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 486 (1994). Under Heck , Ortiz’s allegations are not actionable because he has not shown that his conviction has been reversed on direct appeal, expunged by the executive, invalidated by other state means, or called into question by the issuance of a federal habeas writ. Id. at 487. Accordingly, Ortiz’s appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. The dismissal of his complaint and appeal in this matter each count as a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
See Adepegba v. Hammons , 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Ortiz has accumulated at least two other “strikes.” See Ortiz v. Fernald , No. 04-20186, 2004 WL 1372935 (5th Cir. June 18, 2004) (unpublished). Thus, Ortiz is BARRED from proceeding in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) SANCTIONS IMPOSED.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1729 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to authorize certain practitioners 

other than physicians to dispense certain narcotic drugs in schedule 

III, IV, and V for maintenance treatment or detoxification treatment 

without obtaining annually a separate registration for that purpose. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 4, 2011 

Mr. RUPPERSBERGER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee 

on the Judiciary, 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 amend the Controlled Substances Act to authorize certain 

practitioners other than physicians to dispense certain 

narcotic drugs in schedule III, IV, and V for maintenance treatment or detoxification treatment without obtaining annually a separate registration for that purpose. 

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 ‘‘Opiate Addiction 

5 Treatment Act of 2011’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1729 IH

1 SEC. 2. PRACTITIONERS ELIGIBLE TO DISPENSE NARCOTIC 

2 DRUGS IN SCHEDULE III, IV, AND V FOR 

3 MAINTENANCE TREATMENT OR DETOXIFICA4 TION TREATMENT WITHOUT SEPARATE REG5 ISTRATION. 

6 Section 303(g) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 

7 U.S.C. 823(g)) is amended— 

8 (1) in paragraph (2)(B)(i), by striking ‘‘quali9 fying physician’’ and inserting ‘‘qualifying practi10 tioner’’; and 

11 (2) in paragraph (2)(G)— 

12 (A) in the matter preceding subclause 

13 (I)— 

14 (i) by striking the term ‘‘qualifying 

15 physician’’ and inserting ‘‘qualifying prac16 titioner’’; and 

17 (ii) by striking ‘‘means a physician’’ 

18 and inserting ‘‘means a physician, or a 

19 nurse practitioner with a graduate nursing 

20 degree,’’; and 

21 (B) in subclauses (II), (IV), and (VII), by 

22 striking the term ‘‘physician’’ each place such 

23 term appears and inserting ‘‘physician or nurse 

24 practitioner’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1747 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the rule 

treating certain farming business machinery and equipment as 5-year 

property. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 5, 2011 

Mr. HERGER (for himself, Mr. KIND, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. GRAVES

of Missouri, and Mr. LATHAM) introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make 

permanent the rule treating certain farming business 

machinery and equipment as 5-year property. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT TREATMENT OF CERTAIN FARM4 ING AND BUSINESS MACHINERY AND EQUIP5 MENT AS 5-YEAR PROPERTY. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Clause (vii) of section 

7 168(e)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

8 amended by striking ‘‘, and which is placed in service be9 fore January 1, 2010’’. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 1747 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section shall apply to property placed in service after 

3 December 31, 2009. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### Chano ARRELLANO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 28988.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 1, 1957.

*653Lincoln Clark, Pearsall, Oliver & Oliver, San Antonio, for appellant.

Hubert W. 'Green, Jr., Criminal Dist. Atty., Anthony J. Ferro, Asst. Criminal Dist. Atty., San Antonio, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State,

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is aggravated assault with a motor vehicle as denounced by Article 1149, Vernon’s Ann.P.C.; the punishment, one month in jail and a fine of $100.

The witness Harle, inspector for the Highway Department, testified that he and his assistants were surveying for the construction of a new bridge, and, in the course of doing so, they stopped the south bound traffic in order to let the north bound traffic cross the old bridge, which they had limited to one-way traffic. A milk truck travelling south stopped at the end of the bridge and an Oldsmobile was proceeding north across the bridge when, according to the witness, the appellant’s truck, which was proceeding south, drove around the milk track and collided with the Oldsmobile on the appellant’s left-hand side of the bridge.

The witness Horne, who was riding in the Oldsmobile and was injured, testified that as they approached the bridge while travelling north they observed a sign for the south bound traffic to stop, and after they got on the bridge a truck driven by the appellant came “around those cars that were stopped” and collided with the automobile in which he was riding.

The appellant, testifying in his own behalf, stated that he saw no stop sign at the bridge and thought that the milk truck was moving until he got to within 30 feet of it, and that he immediately applied his brakes as soon as he saw the milk truck was stopped. His explanation of the collision was that when he applied his brakes he “felt something throw me out of the seat,” that he hit the bridge, and “then I must have hit the car.” He denied that he had seen the Oldsmobile until after the collision.

Trial was before the court without the intervention of a jury, and there are no bills of exception in the record.

We have concluded that the evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that the appellant failed to keep a proper lookout and, as the result of such negligence, caused the collision and the incident injuries to the witness Horne.

Finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction and no reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.