alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered April 1 9 , 2018

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 18

- 00382

- CV

IN RE PETER BEASLEY, Relator

Original Proceeding from the 296th Judicial District Court

Co llin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 296

- 05741

- 2017



### O RDER

Before Justices Bridges, Brown, and Boatright

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relator’s April 5, 2018 petition for

writ of mandamus. We ORDER relator to bear the costs, if any, of this original proceeding.

/s/ ADA BROWN

JUSTICE
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

468 KA 15-00001 PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., LINDLEY, DEJOSEPH, NEMOYER, AND CURRAN, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

GREGORY BAIRD, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES A. HOBBS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (LEAH R. MERVINE OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Melchor E. Castro, A.J.), rendered October 14, 2014. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the first degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15 [3]), defendant contends that his plea was not knowing and voluntary because County Court did not conduct the requisite further inquiry after he negated an essential element of the crime during the plea colloquy by denying that he threatened the use of a dangerous instrument. At the outset, we note that defendant’s contention survives his valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see People v Theall , 109 AD3d 1107, 1107-1108, lv denied 22 NY3d 1159). Nevertheless, even assuming, arguendo, that his contention falls within the narrow exception to the preservation requirement ( see People v Lopez , 71 NY2d 662, 666), we conclude that the court “fulfilled its duty to conduct further inquiry to ensure that the plea was entered knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently” ( People v Dash , 74 AD3d 1859, 1860, lv denied 15 NY3d 892 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Lopez , 71 NY2d at 666). Specifically, after the court noted that defendant appeared to have negated the element in question, defendant conferred with his attorney and thereafter admitted that he had a box cutter that was visible outside his pocket, that his hand was inches from the box cutter, and that he told the victim that he did not want to hurt her. Those admissions are sufficient to show that defendant threatened the use of a dangerous instrument, and we therefore conclude that the court properly accepted the plea ( see People v Lawrence , 118 AD3d 1501, 1502, lv denied 24 NY3d 1220; see also People v Skinner , 284 AD2d 906, 907; People v Norman , 284 AD2d 933, 933-934,-2- 468 KA 15-00001

lv denied 96 NY2d 905).
Defendant’s further contention that his plea was coerced by his attorney also survives his waiver of the right to appeal, but he failed to preserve it for our review inasmuch as he did not move to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction ( see Dash , 74 AD3d at 1859-1860), and we conclude in any event that it is without merit.

Entered: May 5, 2017 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4867 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4867

  To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain licorice extract 
                              derivatives.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2012

 Mr. Andrews introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain licorice extract 
                              derivatives.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN LICORICE EXTRACT DERIVATIVES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        Licorice extract    Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          derivatives                                                       12/31/2015
                          including those
                          described as
                          Glycyrrhizic and
                          Glycyrrhenticic
                          Acids and their
                          salts and esters
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          2938.90.00)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-4819

_____________________________

BARRY HABER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Gadsden County.

Barbara K. Hobbs, Judge.

February 27, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Chuck Hobbs, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
2

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey,

Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUI T

____________________

_____ KAISER ALUMINUM FABRICATED PRODUCTS, LLC,

Petitioner, Case No. 11
- 3885

v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY,

Respondent.

__________________________ ___________/ STIPULATION TO DISMISS WHEREAS, on February 16, 2012, Respondent the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“U.S. EPA”) issued to Petitioner Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated Products, LLC (“Kaiser”) a revised Applicability Determination, wh ich was final and effective on the date of issuance; WHEREAS, by stipulating to dismissal of this Petition, the U.S. EPA and Kaiser expressly reserve and do not waive or limit their respective authorities or rights, as applicable, under the Clean Air Act, including but not limited to rights and arguments in connection with any proposed or subsequent Clean Air Act rulemaking by U.S. EPA which may affect the issues addressed in the Applicability Determination; NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 33 of the Local Rules of the Sixth Circuit, the undersigned counsel for Kaiser and the U.S. EPA hereby stipulate and agree that the above Appeal may and shall be dismissed with prejudice and with each party to bear its own costs, upon the above terms as have been agreed up on by the parties. Case: 11-3885 Document: 006111250265 Filed: 03/21/2012 Page: 12 Respectfully submitted, BARNES & THORNBURG LLP Attorneys for Petitioner Kaiser Aluminum Fabricated Products, LLC
Dated: March 21, 2012 /s/ Valerie B. Mullican Charles M. Denton (P33269) Valerie B. Mullican (P74045) 171 Monroe Ave NW, Ste 1000 Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 (616) 742

- 3930

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ENVIRONMENT & NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION Attorneys for Respondent United States Environmental Protection Agency
Dated: March 21, 2012 /s/ Laurel A. Bedig Laurel A. Bedig 601 D Street NW, Suite 8000 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 305

- 0331 Case: 11-3885 Document: 006111250265 Filed: 03/21/2012 Page: 23 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading has been served on all counsel of record via the Court’s CM/ECF system on this 21 stday of March, 2012. Dated: March 21, 2012 /s/ Valerie B. Mullican Valerie B. Mullican Case: 11-3885 Document: 006111250265 Filed: 03/21/2012 Page: 3
#### Artimio VALDEZ, Appellant v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 25429.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 30, 1951.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction of aggravated assault on a female. The punishment was assessed by the court at a fine of $100 and 90 days in jail.

The record contains an affidavit, in proper form, requesting that the court dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s request is granted. The appeal is dismissed.
|                                                                   
|-------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                   
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                     
|View History: Annual                                               
|View History: Annual                                               
|View History:                                                      
|                                                                   
|Utah Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (Million Barrels)
|                                                                   
|                                                                   
|Utah Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Proved Reserves (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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 488   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 518    | 582    | 700    | 670    | 606    | 412    | 397    | 318    | 432    | 298   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 389    | 550    |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4862 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Diphosphoric acid, polymers 

with ethoxylated reduced methyl esters of reduced polymerized oxidized 

tetrafluoroethylene. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Diphosphoric 

acid, polymers with ethoxylated reduced methyl esters 

of reduced polymerized oxidized tetrafluoroethylene. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DIPHOSPHORIC ACID, POLYMERS WITH 

4 ETHOXYLATED REDUCED METHYL ESTERS 

5 OF REDUCED POLYMERIZED OXIDIZED 

6 TETRAFLUOROETHYLENE. 

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

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4862 IH

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Diphosphoric acid, polymers with ethoxylated reduced methyl esters of reduced polymerized oxidized 

tetrafluoroethylene (CAS 

No. 200013–65–6) (provided for in subheading 

3907.20.00) ....................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

4 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

5 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

6 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### GLOVER v. STATE.

No. 24482.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 21, 1949.

None on appeal.

George P. Blackburn, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge..

Appellant, was convicted of giving a check to another, in payment of $4,015.28 without having sufficient funds in the 'bank upon which such check was drawn to pay the same. .'He was assessed a term of two years in the state penitentiary from which conviction he appeals.

The record shows that appellant purchased $4,015.28 worth of cattle from the Athens 'Commission Company, offering in payment therefor a check upon the First Security State Bank of Cranfills Gap, Texas, in such sum. The uncontradicted testimony shows that he had no funds in such bank. on the date the check was. executed, nor had he had any funds therein for' some time prior thereto. He soon sold these cattle and did not apply the proceeds therefor to the payment of such check.

Appellant testified herein and admitted getting the cattle. He aiso admitted that he gave the, check therefor and stated that at the time he executed the check, he did not have an account in the bank on which the check was drawn.

There is hut one bill of exception herein and it relates to the hearing on the motion for a new trial. In such hearing appellant endeavored to introduce in evidence the petition in a certain civil suit wherein the Athens Commission Company entered such suit against the appellant, the baáis of which seemed to be an effort to recover for such cattle as were sold to appellant and paid'for by this check upon which payment was refused because of insufficient funds, the appellant’s contention being “for the reason the plaintiff in this case elected to file a civil suit, and they abandoned the civil suit and brought criminal prosecution.” This testimony was not allowed by the trial court, and we think correctly so. The fact that one who has been defrauded tries by means of a civil action to recoup his losses should not protect appellant from any prosecution in the original transaction, if such criminality existed. The gist of the present offense is the giving of a check on a bank in which there .were no sufficient fuiids with which to pay such check.

No error appearing herein, the judgment is affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4741 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4741

 To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on Avermectin B.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 25, 2012

   Mr. Johnson of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend and modify the temporary reduction of duty on Avermectin B.

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

SECTION 1. AVERMECTIN B.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.56 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating Avermectin B) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``3824.90.92 or'' in the article 
        description column;
            (2) by striking the percentage in the general rate of duty 
        column and inserting ``2.4%'' ; and
            (3) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### JENKINS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. et al. v. HUNT et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 2, 1951.

*66Harry L. Moore, Whitesburg, for appellants.

LeRoy W. Fields, Whitesburg, for ap-pellees.

CAMMACK, Chief Justice.

Jenkins is now a city of the fourth class. The boundaries of the City extend beyond those of the Jenkins Independent School District. The school district is authorized under KRS 158.120 to charge tuition for nonresident pupils. Elmer Hunt lives within the part of the City which lies beyond the boundaries of the school district. A controversy arose between Hunt and the School Board as to his right to send his children to school in the Independent District. The School Board instituted this action seeking to enjoin Hunt from sending his children to school until the tuition was paid. In defending the action Hunt asserted that he had a legal right to send his .children to school in the Independent District.

The chancellor disposed of the case in the following manner:

> “The Court is of the opinion that the plaintiffs áre not entitled to an injunction because, First: No great or irreparable injury is shown which would authorize the issual of an injunction, and Second, Because, if the defendants are not permitted to attend that school, the plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law. The teachers and the school authorities ought to be able to prevent these children from attending that school if they do not want them to attend.

> “As to the right of the defendants to attend that school the Court is of the opinion that they do not have this right unless this particular territory where defendants live is made a part of the Jenkins Independent School District, and this may be done by following the procedure outline in KRS 160.045.”

We think the School Board is entitled to the relief sought. It had a legal right to charge tuition for nonresident pupils. The Letcher County School District maintains a school which Hunt’s children could attend without paying tuition. When he was notified that his children could not attend school unless the tuition was paid, considerable disturbance was created by Hunt and his friends which disrupted the school activities. Clearly, this is a case warranting injunctive relief.

Judgment reversed, with directions to set it aside, and for the entry of a judgment consistent with this opinion.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4941 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4941

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-Oxepanone, polymer with 
      aziridine and tetrahydro- 2H-pyran-2-one, dodecanoate ester.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2012

Mr. LaTourette introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-Oxepanone, polymer with 
      aziridine and tetrahydro- 2H-pyran-2-one, dodecanoate ester.

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

SECTION 1. 2-OXEPANONE, POLYMER WITH AZIRIDINE AND TETRAHYDRO- 2H-
              PYRAN-2-ONE, DODECANOATE ESTER.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.24 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 2-Oxepanone, polymer with 
aziridine and tetrahydro- 2H-pyran-2-one, dodecanoate ester) is 
amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(CAS No. 202263-77-2)'' after ``ester''; 
        and
            (2) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 Exhibit
32.2 Certification of
Periodic Report  Pursuant
to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned
officer of Worldwide Energy and Manufacturing USA, Inc. (the Company), hereby
certifies that, to the undersigneds knowledge: (1)
the Companys Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, 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.  Dated:
May 14, 2009/s/ John BallardName: John
BallardTitle: Chief Financial
Officer