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

No. 27808.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 16, 1955.

Ramey & Ramey, by J. R. Rameyj Sulphur Springs, for appellant.

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

WOODLEY, Judge.

The conviction is for possession of whis-ky in a dry area for the purpose of sale; the punishment, four months in jail and a fine of $500.

A statement of the evidence is not deemed necessary. Suffice it to say that seven pint bottles of whisky were found in a service station operated by appellant, in a dry area, five pints were found in a desk drawer, one pint in a cigar box on the desk, and one pint in a Car on the wash rack.

Among the many, grounds of error for which reversal is claimed is that the jury was not required to find that appellant possessed the whisky for the purpose of sale.

The jury was not told that if they found beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant possessed whisky in a dry area for the purpose of sale to convict, otherwise to acquit. In fact, the court does, not appear to have applied the law from the standpoint of the State.

The court was careful to instruct the jury that unless they found that the filling station, the desk, and the whisky were in appellant’s possession to acquit, but declined to submit appellant’s requested charge requiring the jury, in order to convict, to find that he possessed the whisky for the purpose of sale.

Without a finding that appellant possessed the whisky for the purpose of sale, the conviction cannot be permitted to stand.

. The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Exhibit 4.386

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF TELECOM,
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES AND MASS COMMUNICATIONS

 

LICENSE

 

No. 170435 dated February 17, 2019

 

To render

 

data transmission services for voice

 

This license has been granted to

 

Public Joint Stock Company

 

“Mobile TeleSystems”

 

Legal Entity (Individual Entrepreneur) 
 Primary State Registration Number 
 (PSRN/OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1027700149124

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN/INN)

 

7740000076

 











 

Principal place of business (residence):

 

109147, Moscow, Marksistskaya St., 4

 

The territory of the services is specified in appendix hereto.

 

This license is valid through:

 

February 17, 2024

 

This license is issued based on the decision of the licensing authority - Order No. 816-рчс dated November 30, 2018

 

This license has an appendix as an integral part, which is executed on two sheets

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/ A.A. Pankov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here
    	
 
    
	
Official   seal:
    MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND MASS
   COMMUNICATIONS
   OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
   FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
   OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION
   TECHNOLOGY
   AND MASS MEDIA
   PSRN 1087746736296
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council

          - [Docket No. AS24-07]

# AGENCY:

Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council.

# ACTION:

Notice of special closed meeting.
      ( print page 15574)    
*Description:*                     In accordance with section 1104(b) of title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) met for a Special Closed Meeting on this date.                

*Location:*                     Virtual meeting via Webex.                

*Date:*                     February 28, 2024.                

*Time:*                     11 a.m. ET.                

## Action and Discussion Item

Personnel Matter

The ASC convened a Special Closed Meeting to discuss a personnel matter. No action was taken by the ASC.

James R. Park,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 2024-04518 Filed 3-1-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6700-01-P
No. 84570 

# FILE
APR 1 9 202

BR ; • BY DEPUTY IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF THE RESIGNATION OF GREGORY L. JENSEN, BAR NO. 1421.

ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR RESIGNATION This is a joint petition by the State Bar of Nevada and attorney Gregory L. Jensen for his resignation from the Nevada bar.

SCR 98(5) provides that Nevada attorneys who are not actively practicing law in this state may resign from the state bar if certain conditions are met. The petition includes statements from state bar staff confirming that no disciplinary, fee dispute arbitration, or client security fund matters are pending against Jensen; and that he is current on all membership fee payments and other financial commitments relating to his practice of law in this state. See SCR 98(5)(a)(1)-(2).

Bar counsel has recommended that the resignation be approved, and the Board of Governors has approved the application for resignation. SeeSCR 98(5)(a)(2). Jensen acknowledges that his resignation is irrevocable and that the state bar retains continuing jurisdiction with respect to matters involving a past member's conduct prior to resignation. See SCR 98(5)(c)-(d). Finally, Jensen has submitted an affidavit of compliance with SCR 115. See SCR 98(5)(e).



# t2-12.11.1The petition satisfies the requirements of SCR 98(5).

Accordingly, we approve attorney Gregory L. Jensen's resignation. SCR 98(5)(a)(2). The petition is hereby granted.

It is so ORDERED.

cc: Bar Counsel, State Bar of Nevada Gregory L. Jensen Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 401. 2
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4439 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Fenpyroximate. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 19, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Fenpyroximate. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FENPYROXIMATE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 tert-Butyl (E)-α-(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxypyrazol-4- 

ylmethyleneamino oxy)-ρtoluate (Fenpyroximate) 

(CAS No. 134098–61–6) 

(provided for in subheading 2933.19.23) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4439 IH

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
*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. 01-30653

Summary Calendar

 

RELIABLE HOME HEALTH CARE, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

TOMMY G. THOMPSON, SECRETARY OF

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES;

PALMETTO GOVERNMENT BENEFITS

ADMINISTRATION,

Defendants-Appellees.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Louisiana

(USDC No. 00-CV-2445)

_______________________________________________________

November 20, 2001

Before REAVLEY, HIGGINBOTHAM and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the reasons given by that court by

its order entered May 2, 2001.
2

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 13.2

                  CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

          In connection with the Annual Report of China Techfaith Wireless
Communication Technology Limited (the "Company") on Form 20-F for the year ended
December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher Holbert, Chief Financial 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 to 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.

Date: June 12, 2008


By: /s/ Christopher Holbert
    ---------------------------------
Name: Christopher Holbert
Title: Chief Financial Officer
#### Clarence Alvin CHILDRESS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27567.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 4, 1955.

*858Ney Wade, Rockwall, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Crim. Dist. Atty., M. K. Bercaw, Asst. Dist. Atty., Charles S. Potts, Asst. Dist. Atty., Dallas, Leon Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated wherein the jury, composed of five men and one woman, returned a verdict assessing the minimum punishment of three days in jail and a fine of $50.

There is no statement of facts, and the sole question presented on the appeal is predicated upon the woman ju'ror being permitted to serve in the case.

Trial was had in County Criminal Court No. 2 of Dallas County on November 23, 1954.

It was shown at the hearing of appellant’s motion for new trial that W. Powers, or Waunetta Powers, a married woman, was summoned as a juror for the week and was one of a jury panel selected according to the statute. She came to County Criminal Court No. 2 as one of a panel of twelve from the central jury room, was accepted as a juror and her qualifications other than the question of her sex are not questioned.

It is appellant’s contention that on the date of the trial and prior thereto the amendment to Art. XVI, Sec. 19, of the Constitution of Texas, Vernon’s Ann.St., passed by the voters of this State at the election held November 2, 1954, had not become effective. He further contends that enabling legislation would be required before a female could serve as a juror in this State because of the provisions of Art. 578, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., Art. 2191, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St., and other statutes.

In the recent case of Torres v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 278 S.W.2d 853, we held that the amendment of Art. XVI, Sec. 19, of the Constitution of Texas, providing that neither the right nor the duty to serve on grand or petit juries shall be denied or abridged by reason of sex, became effective on November 19, 1954, when the returns of the election were canvassed. Upon its becoming effective, the new amendment authorized women to serve as jurors and the provisions of the statutes limiting juries to males became invalid as contrary to the Constitution.

The case before us having been tried after such effective date of the amendment of the Constitution, Mrs. Powers was not disqualified to serve as a juror at the trial.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### RICHARDSON v. STATE.

No. 26724.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 6, 1954.

*258No attorney on appeal.

James Pearson, County Atty., Sweet-water, Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the complaint and information charging him in three counts with violations of the liquor law in Nolan County, and his punishment was assessed at a fine of $600 and confinement in the 'County jail for six months.

The record is before this court without a statement of facts or bills of exception. All matters of procedure appear regular.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
#### In the Matter of John R. Grant, an Attorney, Resignor.

Second Department,

May 20, 1991

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*John R.*Grant, resignor *pro se.*

*Robert H. Straus (Diana J. Szochet*of counsel), for Grievance Committee for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

John R. Grant has submitted an affidavit dated December 4, 1990, wherein he tenders his resignation as an attorney and counselor-at-law (22 NYCRR 691.9). Mr. Grant was admitted to the practice of law by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial Department, on July 13, 1983.

Mr. Grant acknowledges that he is the subject of an investí*98gation by the Grievance Committee for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts concerning allegations that he converted escrow funds entrusted to him by drawing checks upon his escrow account for his own personal use and repeatedly maintaining insufficient balances in said account.

Mr. Grant indicates that he could not successfully defend himself on the merits against charges predicated upon the misconduct outlined in his affidavit of resignation, that his resignation is freely and voluntarily tendered, that he is not being subjected to coercion or duress, and that he is fully aware of the implications of submitting his resignation.

Counsel to the Grievance Committee recommends that the court accept the resignation. Under the circumstances herein, the resignation of John R. Grant as a member of the Bar is accepted and directed to be filed. Accordingly, John R. Grant is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately.

Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the resignation of John R. Grant is accepted and directed to be filed; and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately, John R. Grant is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,

Ordered that John R. Grant shall promptly comply with this court’s rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended and resigned attorneys (22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law §90, effective immediately, John R. Grant is commanded to desist and refrain (1) from practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or employee of another, (2) from appearing as an attorney or counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission or other public authority, (3) from giving to another an opinion as to the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4) from holding himself out in any way as an attorney and counselor-at-law.
#### Harry W. HICKS, Appellant, v. Nettie C. HICKS, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Oct. 7, 1955.

Roberts & Parham, Mayfield, M. C. Anderson, Wickliffe, for appellant.

Robbins & Cross, Mayfield, Waller, Threlkeld & Whitlow, Paducah, for appel-lee.

CLAY, Commissioner.

Appellant husband sued appellee for divorce on the grounds of abandonment and cruel and inhuman treatment. Though there had apparently been a property settlement, the suit was contested, and the Chancellor dismissed appellant’s complaint upon a finding that he had failed to prove either of the grounds of divorce.

With respect to the claim of abandonment, appellant testified that on March 21, 1950, appellee left his home where he was living with his mother and did not return. She had moved into a new home the parties had built. According to her testimony, she and her husband had planned to move into the new home on the date she left, and appellant’s mother had requested appellee to leave the residence they had theretofore occupied. Like the Chancellor, we are of the opinion appellant failed to prove abandonment by his wife, and even assuming his testimony tended to prove this fact, the Chancellor was justified in accepting appellee’s testimony, which clearly disproved it. Certainly the Chancellor’s finding was not clearly erroneous. CR 52.01.

With respect to the charge of cruel and inhuman treatment, appellant testified his wife neglected him, she did a lot of talking, she sometimes embarrassed him, and she was somewhat dominating. This latter attitude may be explained by the fact that the wife principally paid the living expenses of the family from her own income.

*844The few' events recited . by appellant amount to no more than ordinary family quarrels which take place in- almost any household. Viewing appellant’s evidence in the most favorable light, it falls far short of proving cruel and inhuman treatment, which would authorize a divorce under KRS 403.020(4) (d). We find no'reversible error.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### SHIELDS v. STATE.

No. 26809.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 3, 1954.

*118No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

Wesley Dice, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

The sale and delivery of beer in a dry area is the .offense; the punishment, seventy-five days’ confinement in jail.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception, without which nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court
##### 



(TELECOMMUNICATION SYSTEMS LOGO) Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS I, Thomas M. Brandt, Jr, certify that:  a)
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of TeleCommunication
Systems, Inc.;b)
    
    Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this report;c)
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;d)
    
    The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant
and have:  a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected or is
reasonably likely to materially affect the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and  e)
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):  a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal controls over financial reporting. November 15, 2004
    /s/ Thomas M. Brandt, Jr.Thomas M. Brandt, Jr.Sr. Vice President & CFO
EXHIBIT 31.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
           (Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
                             15 U.S.C. Section 78m)



I, J. Philip Hester, Sr., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Chestatee Bancshares,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

         a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;
         b. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
         c. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing similar functions):

         a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and
         b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.


Date:  April 27, 2007             By:  /s/ J. Philip Hester, Sr.
       --------------                  ----------------------------------------
                                       J. Philip Hester, Sr., President and CEO
                                       (Principal Executive Officer)



<PAGE>