alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In compliance with the requirement for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects (section 3506(c)(2)(A) of Title 44, United States Code, as amended by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13), the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) publishes periodic summaries of proposed projects being developed for submission to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and draft instruments, call the HRSA Reports Clearance Officer on (301) 443-1129.

Comments are invited on: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

## Proposed Project: Loan Information System Records for the DHHS and DHUD Hospital Mortgage Insurance, Guarantee, and Direct Loan Programs (OMB 0915-0174)—Extension

The Division of Facilities Loans within the Health Resources and Services Administration monitors outstanding direct and guaranteed loans made under Section 621 of Title VI and Section 1601 of Title XVI of the Public Health Service Act, as well as loans insured under the Section 242 Hospital Mortgage Insurance Program of the National Housing Act. These programs were designed to aid construction and modernization of health care facilities by increasing the access of facilities to capital through the assumption of the mortgage credit risk by the Federal Government.

Operating statistics and financial information are collected annually from hospitals with mortgages that are insured under these programs. The information is used to monitor the financial stability of the hospitals to protect the Federal investment in these facilities. The form used for the data collection is the Hospital Facility Data Abstract. No changes in the form are proposed.

The estimated response burden is as follows:

Send comments to Susan G. Queen, Ph.D., HRSA Reports Clearance Officer, Room 14-33, Parklawn Building, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857. Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice.

Dated: January 28, 2000.

Jane Harrison,

Director, Division of Policy Review and Coordination.

[FR Doc. 00-2433 Filed 2-3-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-15-P
|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                              
|View History: Annual                                                        
|View History: Annual                                                        
|View History:                                                               
|                                                                            
|Kentucky Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                            
|                                                                            
|Kentucky Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                            

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 4     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | -11    | 1      | -10    | 8      | -1     | -4     | 0      | -1     | 1      | -1    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | -4     | 4      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### ATKINS v. STATE.

No. 23415.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 19, 1946.

Hardin & Bransford, of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Alfred M. Clyde, Cr. Dist. Atty., and Ardell M. Young, J. Elwood Winters, and W. E. Myres, Asst. Cr. Dist. Attys., all of Fort Worth, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The offense is murder; the punishment, twenty years’ confinement in the penitentiary.

That appellant killed the deceased by shooting him with a small-calibre pistol is *144shown, primarily, by appellants extrajudicial confession to the arresting officers.

Appellant did not testify as a witness in his own behalf, nor did he present any affirmative defensive testimony.

The confession, together with proof of the “corpus delicti,” is sufficient in law to sustain the jury’s conclusion of guilt.

Not having been excepted to by appellant, the action of the trial court in refusing the special requested charges prevents our consideration of such charges.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
|                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                           
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                       
|View History:                                                                              
|                                                                                           
|Ohio Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                           
|                                                                                           
|Ohio Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                           

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 3      | 5      | 1      | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
|                                                                                     
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                 
|View History:                                                                        
|                                                                                     
|California Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                     
|                                                                                     
|California Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 119   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 167    | 230    | 391    | 116    | 247    | 619    | 280    | 113    | 142    | 371   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 655    | 66     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. GARY H. LANE,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 14

- 10081
D.C. No. 3:12

- cr - 00078

- RCJ

- VPC

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Robert Clive Jones, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 13, 2015 ** San Francisco California Before: McKEOWN, MURGUIA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges. Gary Lane appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to twelve counts of mail fraud and five counts of attempted tax evasion. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAR 17 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

The district court did not err

— and c ertainly did not clearly err, see United States v. Aragbaye , 234 F.3d 1101, 1107 (9th Cir. 2000), superseded by statute on other grounds as stated in United States v. McEnry , 659 F.3d 893, 899 n.8 (9th Cir. 2011)

— in imposing a two

- level enhancement on the basis that Lane’s offense involved sophisticated means. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 2B1.1(b)(10)(C) (2013). “Conduct need not involve highly complex schemes or exhibit exceptional brilliance to justify a sophisticated means enhancement.” United States v. Jennings , 711 F.3d 1144, 1145 (9th Cir. 2013). Lane’s conduct was comparable to conduct that we have previously held sufficient to support imposition of this sophisticated means enhancement. See United States v. Tanke , 743 F.3d 1296, 130 7 (9th Cir. 2014); United States v. Horob , 735 F.3d 866, 868

- 69, 872 (9th Cir. 2013) (per curiam). Likewise, the district court did not clearly err, see United States v. Scrivener , 189 F.3d 944, 950 (9th Cir. 1999) , in imposing a two

- level enhancement on the basis that Lane knew or should have known that at least one of his victims was particularly

vulnerable , s ee U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3A1.1(b)(1) (2013). The record amply supports the district court’s impo sition of this enhancement.3

Finally, Lane’s sentence is not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Blinkinsop , 606 F.3d 1110, 1116 (9th Cir. 2010). “[I]n the overwhelming majority of cases, a Guidelines sentence will fall comfortably within the broad range of sentences that would be reasonable in the particular circumstances,” United States
v. Treadwell , 593 F.3d 990, 1015 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting United States v. Carty , 520 F.3d 984, 994 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc)) (internal quotation marks omitted) , and
Lane’s within

- Guidelines sentence is no exception.
AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.2  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 Periodic Report of Tranquility, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the Report), I, Dominick Pope, Principal 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: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  November 12, 2008 /s/ Dominick Pope, Principal Financial Officer
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D 20 23

- 1730 LT Case No. 05

- 2010 -CF- 023506 -A

_____________________________ L EAUNDREA D ERRICO P ARKER , Appella nt,
v. S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee
.

_____________________________ 3.850 A ppeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County. Robert Segal, Judge. Deana K. Mars hall , of the Law Offi ce of Deana K. Marshall, Riverview , for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallaha ssee, and Dougla s Squire, Assistant Attorney Gener al, Daytona Bea ch, for Appellee. May 21, 2 02 4 P ER C URIAM . A FFIRMED . S OUD , B OATWRIGHT , and M AC I VER , J J., concur._____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331 .

_____________________________
FILED

October 8, 1997

Cecil Crowson, Jr.

Appellate C ourt Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

SEPTEMBER 1997 SESSION

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) 

) NO. 02C01-9612-CC-00461

Appellee, )

) BENTON COUNTY

VS. )

) HON. JULIAN P. GUINN, JUDGE

LESTER LEE DOYLE, )

) (DUI 2nd, DORL) 

)

Appellant. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

GUY T. WILKINSON JOHN KNOX WALKUP 

District Public Defender Attorney General and Reporter

24th Judicial District

117 Forrest Avenue North JANIS L. TURNER

P. O. Box 663 Assistant Attorney General

Camden, TN 38320 Criminal Justice Division

450 James Robertson Parkway

Nashville, TN 37243-0493

G. ROBERT RADFORD 

District Attorney General

TODD A. ROSE 

Assistant District Attorney General

P. O. Box 94 

Paris, TN 38242

OPINION FILED: 

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

JOE G. RILEY,

JUDGE
2

O P I N I O N

The defendant, Lester Lee Doyle, was convicted by a Benton County jury of

driving under the influence of an intoxicant, second offense, and driving on a revoked

license. The sole issue presented on appeal is whether the evidence adduced at trial

is sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. We affirm the conviction.

On November 14, 1995, at about 11:00 p.m., the arresting officer observed

defendant cross the highway center line two times and run off the road once. The

officer stopped the defendant. Defendant had a strong odor of alcohol about him and

was unable to properly perform the field sobriety tests. Two other officers testified

that defendant was drunk. Defendant refused the breathalyser test. The revoked

status of his driver’s license was stipulated. 

Defendant admitted to having three beers, but said that he was not impaired.

Defendant testified that his weaving was probably due to a low tire, and he felt he had

passed the field sobriety tests. The wrecker driver who towed the car said he had not

noticed whether the tire was flat before he towed it, but he noticed the tire was flat the

next morning.

After thoroughly reviewing the record, the briefs, and the law governing the

issue presented by the defendant, we conclude that the evidence is sufficient to

support the finding by the trier of fact of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that no

error of law requiring a reversal of the judgment is apparent. Accordingly, pursuant

to Rule 20 of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, we affirm the judgment of

the trial court.

 

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

CONCUR:

 

JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE

 

DAVID H. WELLES, JUDGE
|                                                                                                
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                            
|View History: Annual                                                                            
|View History:                                                                                   
|                                                                                                
|Texas - RRC District 7B Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                
|                                                                                                
|Texas - RRC District 7B Dry Natural Gas Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 2      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 2      | 9      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
THOMAS J. WOODY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4860

_____________________________/

Opinion filed April 13, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Roberto Arias, Judge.

Thomas J. Woody, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

ROWE, OSTERHAUS, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                             CERTIFICATION OF CFO
                      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 on Form 10-Q/A of Madison River
Capital, LLC (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Paul H. Sunu, as Managing Director, Chief Financial Officer and
Secretary of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 results of operations of the
Company.



/s/ Paul H. Sunu
------------------------------------------------------

Name:   Paul H. Sunu
Title:  Managing Director, Chief Financial Officer
        and Secretary
Date:   March 31, 2006





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.