alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. PD-0104/0105/0106-15

IGNACIO MARTIN GONZALEZ, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HARRIS COUNTY

PER CURIAM. KEASLER and HERVEY, JJ., dissent.

ORDER

The petition for discretionary review violates Rule of Appellate Procedure 68.4(j),

and 9.4(i)(2)(D), because it does not contain a copy of the opinion of the court of appeals,

and the petition exceeds the proper page limits.

The petition is struck. See Rule of Appellate Procedure 68.6.

The petitioner may redraw the petition. The redrawn petition and copies must be

filed in the Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty days after the date of this order.

Filed: June 10, 2015

Do Not Publish
#### TURNER v. STATE.

No. 23360.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 22, 1946.

No attorney for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Dist. Atty., and E. T. Branch, Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Houston, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is theft of property over the value of $50. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a period of ten years.

The record is before us without any bills of exception or objections to the court’s charge. The only question presented for review is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction.

The statement of facts shows that on the afternoon of the 17th day of August, 1945, two suitcases disappeared from a baggage truck at the Union Station in the City of Houston. On the same afternoon appellant came to the Majestic Hotel with two suitcases, engaged a room, and while in his room, he forced open the suitcases and spread the contents out on his bed. ' He then inquired of the porter if he knew of anyone who wished to buy any ladies’ wearing apparel. The porter replied that he did not. Appellant then took off all of his clothes except his underwear and in that condition sat in his room with the door open. Some of the guests at the hotel complained thereof to the manager, who called the police station. Soon two policemen appeared and took appellant, the suitcases, and the contents thereof to the police station. One of the suitcases belonged to Miss Joye J. Smith, who identified it, as well as her wearing apparel, *563and stated the aggregate value thereof to be $227.25. Appellant did not testify or offer any evidence whatsoever.

It will be noted from the foregoing statement of the State’s evidence that it is ample to support the conviction.

Accompanying the record, but not included therein nor a part thereof, is a judgment of conviction for a misdemeanor offense of like character of a person by the same name as that of appellant. There is also a copy of an indictment charging a person by the same name with ¡theft of certain wearing apparel from the. same person as in the instant case and on the same day. However, these matters do not seem to have been offered in evidence upon the trial. Neither are they a part- of the statement of facts and therefore cannot be considered by us. Moreover, it is not shown that the party convicted of the offense of misdemeanor theft and appellant were one and the same person.

No reversible error appearing from the record, 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.
U.S. Department of Justice 

United States Marshals Service ' 

Western District of Texas 

United Slates Courthouse 

525 Magoffin Street, Suite 161 

El Paso, Texas 79901 

February 7, 2020 

MEMORANDUM TO: United States Attorney's Office 

Attn: AUSA Jose Luis Gonzalez 

FROM: Betty Cabrera, Investigative Research Specialist 

W/TX - El Paso Division - Warrants Section 

SUBJECT: Notice of Incarceration of Federal Prisoner 

The below-named defendant was arrested: 

DEFENDANT: 

CASE #(S): 

VIOLATION(S): 

DATE' OF ARREST/DETAINER: 

INCARCERATED IN: 

Patrick Wood CRUSIUS 

EP-20-CR-3 89-DCG 

2U2U FE 2 I PH 28 

L. 

v 

IT" 

Hate Crime Resulting in Death 

DETAINER FILED: Febnary 6,2020 

* El Paso County Detentioii Facility 

(County Jail/*BOP/TDC) Contact the USMS Criminal Clerk @ 

534-6779 to coordinate defendant's arrival. 

* Detainer filed with El 1so County Detention Facility by the United States Marshals Service 

in El Paso, Texas . If th defendant is needed for court, the United States Attorney needs to provide the 

United States Marshals Servi4e with a Writ of Habeas Corpus adprosequendum to bring defendant to court. 

cc: U.S. District Clerk/U.S. Magistrate 

U.S. ProbationfU.S. Pre-Trial 

U.S. Marshals Service (Criminal Clerk) 

U.S. Marshals Service (D.E.O.) 

U.S. Marshals Service (USM123 File) 

Case 3:20-cr-00389-DCG Document 50 Filed 02/21/20 Page 1 of 1
---

EXHIBIT 12.1

SARBANES-OXLEY CEO CERTIFICATION

I, Ronald W. Thiessen , Chief Executive Officer of Amarc
Resources Ltd. , certify that:

1.
          I have reviewed this
Annual Report on Form 20-F of Amarc Resources Ltd.

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 Company as of, and for,
the periods presented in this report;

4.           The
  Company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 Company 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 Company, 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 Company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 Company's internal control over financial reporting
  that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially
  affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal
  control over financial reporting; and

5.           The
  Companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our
  most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to
  the Companys auditors and the audit committee of Company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 Company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 Companys internal control over financial
  reporting.

|Date:  | September 12, 2005      | 
|------ | ----------------------- | 
|       |                         | 
|       |                         | 
|       | /s/ Ronald W. Thiessen  | 
|By:    | Ronald W. Thiessen      | 
|Title: | Chief Executive Officer | 

---



---
##### 



Exhibit 32
 Certification Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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 Enesco.
 July 28, 2006/s/ Basil A. ElliottBasil ElliottPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) /s/ Marie Meisenbach GraulMarie Meisenbach GraulExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.B 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 on Form 10-Q for the period ending
March 31, 2005, of Southern Natural Gas Company (the Company) as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Greg G. Gruber, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer,
certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ Greg G. GruberGreg G. GruberSenior Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)May 11, 2005
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Southern Natural Gas Company and will be retained by Southern
Natural Gas Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .

                                                      Exhibit 11

                       STERLING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 Statement Re: Computation of Per Share Earnings

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                        Three Months Ended
                                             March 31,
                                  -----------------------------
                                       2003            2002
                                  -------------   -------------
<S>                               <C>             <C>
Net income                        $   5,846,423   $   5,266,301
Less: preferred dividends                31,793          28,376
                                  -------------   -------------
Net income available for common
  shareholders and adjusted for
  diluted computation             $   5,814,630   $   5,237,925
                                  =============   =============

Weighted average common
  shares outstanding                 11,856,325      12,077,821
Add dilutive effect of:
    Stock options                       500,472         548,710
    Convertible preferred stock         231,800         234,415
                                  -------------   -------------
Adjusted for assumed diluted
  computaion                         12,588,597      12,860,946
                                  =============   =============

Basic earnings per share          $        0.49   $        0.43
                                  =============   =============
Diluted earnings per share        $        0.46   $        0.41
                                  =============   =============
</TABLE>

                                       32
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-3989 Directorate Identifier: 2014-NM-250-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection and 

replacement of 

discrepant COG per 

container

2.0 $ 170.00 $390 $ 560.00 953 $533,680.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance: 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $533,680

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $0

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
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 Annual Report of Oragenics, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period
ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the Report), I, Robert T. Zahradnik, Interim 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:

(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 this Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written certification 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.

Dated this March 16,
2007.



/s/ Robert T. ZahradnikRobert T. ZahradnikInterim Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 195 (Friday, October 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 59822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25730]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of the Census


Census Advisory Committee on the American Indian and Alaska 
Native Populations

AGENCY: Bureau of the Census, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463 
as amended by Pub. L. 94-409, Pub. L. 96-523, and Pub. L. 97-375), the 
Bureau of the Census (Census Bureau) is giving notice of a meeting of 
the Census Advisory Committee on the American Indian and Alaska Native 
Populations. The meeting will focus on data and geographic products 
affecting American Indians and Alaska Native Populations. We are still 
finalizing the details of the meeting's agenda.

DATES: November 1, 2000. The meeting will begin at 12:30 p.m. and end 
at approximately 5:15 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the Hilton Alexandria Mark 
Center, 5000 Seminary Road, Alexandria, VA 22311.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maxine Anderson-Brown, Committee 
Liaison Officer, Census Bureau, Department of Commerce, Room 1647, 
Federal Building 3, Washington, DC 20233, telephone 301-457-2308, TDD 
301-457-2540.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee is composed of nine members 
appointed by the Secretary of Commerce. The Committee provides a 
channel of communication between the representative communities and the 
Census Bureau. It assists the Census Bureau in its efforts to reduce 
the differential undercount for American Indian and Alaska Native 
Populations and advises on ways that decennial census data can best be 
disseminated to communities and other users. It provides advice and 
recommendations for the Census Bureau to consider in planning the 2010 
census and the American Community Survey.
    The meeting is open to the public, and a brief period is set aside 
during the closing session for public comment and questions. Those 
persons with extensive questions or statements must submit them in 
writing to the Census Bureau Committee Liaison Officer, named above, at 
least three days before the meeting.
    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to the Census Bureau Committee Liaison Officer at 
least three days prior to the meeting.

    Dated: October 3, 2000.
Kenneth Prewitt,
Director, Bureau of the Census.
[FR Doc. 00-25730 Filed 10-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-07-P
_______________________________________ __ ___________________ ________________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

June 21, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, 133858 Justices

TIMOTHY TERRY, #327307

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 133858 CoA: 272976 DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,

Defendant-Appellee.

On order of the Chief Ju stice, it appearing that a ppellant has failed to tender the entry fee prescribed by MC R 7.319 (B)(7) and has failed to provide documentation to permit the calculation of an appr opriate partial fee, the Clerk is directed to close this file.

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

June 21, 2007

Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC d/b/a 

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-458-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

Please take notice that attorney Jeffrey Huang of the law firm ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP, 

PLLC appears as counsel of record for Plaintiff WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC d/b/a BRAZOS 

LICENSING AND DEVELOPMENT. Mr. Huang hereby requests that all notices required to be 

given, and all papers required to be served in the above-entitled and numbered cause, be copied 

to and served upon him.

Dated: August 3, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Jeffrey Huang

Jeffrey Huang

California State Bar No. 266774

ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP, PLLC

2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120 / 324

Southlake, Texas 76092

Telephone: (817) 470-7249

Facsimile: (817) 887-5950

jeff@etheridgelaw.com

Case 6:20-cv-00458-ADA Document 15 Filed 08/03/20 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that the foregoing document was served upon all counsel of record via the 

Court's CM/ECF electronic filing system in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure on August 3, 2020.

/s/ Jeffrey Huang

Jeffrey Huang

Case 6:20-cv-00458-ADA Document 15 Filed 08/03/20 Page 2 of 2
* 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. 07-10965 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JAVIER GUILLEN-REYES Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CR-47-1
Before GARWOOD, WIENER and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Javier Guillen-Reyes (Guillen) appeals the 77-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction on one count of illegal reentry. Guillen argues that the district court erred by enhancing his offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) (2006) based on the determination that his prior Texas conviction of burglary of a habitation was a crime of violence as defined by the Sentencing Guidelines. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D April 25, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-10965

2 As Guillen concedes, because he did not object to the district court’s application ofthe enhancement, review is for plain error only. See United States
v. Gracia-Cantu, 302 F.3d 308, 310 (5th Cir. 2002). Plain error exists when the district court committed a clear and obvious error that affected the substantial rights of the defendant. See United States v. Marek, 238 F.3d 310, 315 (5th Cir. 2001). This court will exercise its sound discretion to correct the error if it finds that the error “seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id. The record includes a judicial confession, admi tted at the sentencing hearing below without objection, in which Guillen admitted to facts that establish that he committed the offense of burglary of a habitation in a manner that is equivalent to the enumerated offense of “burglary of a dwelling.” See T EX. P ENAL CODE § 30.02(a)(1); United States v. Garcia-Mendez, 420 F.3d 454, 456-57 (5th Cir. 2005). A written judicial confession may be relied on “in an effort to determine the nature of the Texas offense to which [the defendant] previously pleaded guilty.” United Statesv. Garcia-Arellano, ___ F.3d ___, 2008 WL 771709 (5th Cir. Mar. 25, 2008). In view of the judicial confession, the district court did not err, plainly or otherwise, in enhancing Guillen’s offense level based on his Texas conviction of burglary of a habitation. See id. AFFIRMED.