alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### ADUDDELL v. STATE. WHITE v. STATE.

Nos. 25557, 25558.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 12, 1951.

*235H. A. Leaverton, Seminole, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Appellants, Aduddell and White, were jointly indicted and tried for the offense of passing a forged instrument. Each was assessed a penalty of two years in the penitentiary.

Separate records as to each appellant have been filed in this court and given separate docket numbers. The records are identical. We therefore consolidate the two cases and dispose of them together.

The instrument alleged in the indictment to be a forgery and passed by the appellants purported to be a bill of sale conveying certain pipe Sn Shackelford County to one L. C. Cox. The bill of sale as set forth in the indictment purports to have been signed by three parties, viz., E. Krasner, H. E. White, and E. D. Skipper. There is nothing to show that the names of E. Krasner and H. E. White were signed thereto as witnesses to the signature of E. D. Skipper. The bill of sale introduced upon the trial of the case showed that Krasner and White signed as witnesses.

The variance between the allegations of the indictment and the proof is apparent, and requires a reversal of the conviction.

In addition to the variance mentioned, we note that the indictment did not allege that appellant White was a principal to the commission of the offense by Adud-dell, but attempted to allege facts which it is claimed are sufficient to show that White was, in fact, a principal with Aduddell. The facts stated go no further than to allege that White agreed with Aduddell to aid him in the commission of the offense and are so indefinite as to fail to charge White with any offense.

It is always the safer plan in charging one as a principal to the crime committed by another to charge such person directly with the commission of the crime, rather than to attempt to allege the facts which would constitute one a principal to the commission of a crime by another.

As to appellant Aduddell, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

As to appellant White, the judgment is reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.
----

Euro exchange rates (1)

4 July 2006

(2006/C 156/01)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----
```

                                                                                                EXHIBIT 32

                                   **STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                            AS ENACTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the
"Quarterly Report") of Southern California Edison Company (the "Company"), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as enacted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned certifies, based on his
knowledge, that:

        1.    The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
              Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

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

November 10, 2003
                                                     /s/ Alan J. Fohrer
                                                     ----------------------------------
                                                     Alan J. Fohrer
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
                                                     Southern California Edison Company

                                                     /s/ W. James Scilacci
                                                     ----------------------------------
                                                     W. James Scilacci
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
                                                     Southern California Edison Company

This statement accompanies the Quarterly 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.

A signed original of this written statement 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.
```
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

***Certificationpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002***

***(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)***

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of American States Water Company andGolden State Water Company (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I Robert J. Sprowls, Chief Executive Officerof the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

 

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 
| /s/ ROBERT J. SPROWLS                 |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Robert J. Sprowls                     |   |
| President and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                                  |   |
| Date: May 7, 2010                |   |

 

----
**                                                             **BANGLA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC.**                                                             **

**EXHIBIT 32.1 - CERTIFICATIONS**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO				18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350				AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO				SECTION 906 OF THE *SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*

I, Shuo Lou, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that this report on Form 10-KSB of Bangla Property Management,  Inc. for the  period ending March 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information  contained in this report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the  financial  condition  and results of operations of  Bangla Property Management,  Inc. 				December 2, 2005/s/ Shuo Lou  Shuo Lou, Chief Financial Officer				and Director of Bangla Property Management, Inc.

----

10KSB – Period Ending March 31, 2005                         Bangla Property Management, Inc.                      Page 33

----
|                                                                                                                 
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                 
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                   
|View History: Annual                                                                                             
|View History: Annual                                                                                             
|View History:                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                                 
|California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Revision Decreases (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                                 
|California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore 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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 68    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 125    | 217    | 318    | 79     | 188    | 357    | 98     | 74     | 113    | 309   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 390    | 55     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 1 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 2 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 3 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 4 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 5 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 6 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 7 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 8 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 9 of 10

Case 1:20-cv-00469-LY-AWA   Document 1   Filed 04/30/20   Page 10 of 10
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

GINTARAS RACIUNAS and ALEXANDRA RACIUNAS
, Appellant s ,

v.

ENCORE FUND TRUST 2013

- 1
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 15

- 3874

[ July 13, 2017 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Thomas H. Barkdull, III , Judge; L.T. Case No.

2013CA007389XXXXMN

.

Malcolm E. Harrison and Rachel Bentley of the Law Office of Malcolm E. Harrison, P.A., Wellington, for appellants.

Jennifer Lima

- Smith of the Gilbert Garcia Gro up, P.A., Tampa, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

T

AYLOR

, M AY and C ONNER

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 29, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 130996(48) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, STEVEN FATA, ANNA FATA, DENNIS Justices REILLY and ROSEMARY REILLY,Plaintiffs/Counter-DefendantsAppellees,

v SC: 130996 COA: 257936 Roscommon CC: 02-723576-CH ROSCOMMON COUNTY ROAD COMMISSION,Defendant-Counter-PlaintiffAppellant,

and

LYON TOWNSHIP, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY and DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rec onsideration of this Court’s July 31, 2006 order is considered, and it is DENIED, beca use it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

d0122 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.

January 29, 2007

Clerk
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

In re Kenneth Leo Buholtz

No. 06-17-00098-CV

Original Mandamus Proceeding

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Morriss, 

Justice Moseley and Justice Burgess

participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that Relator is not entitled to the 

relief sought. Therefore, we deny the petition.

RENDERED OCTOBER 17, 2017

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT
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 Sterling Group
Ventures, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended May 31, 2007,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Periodic Report), Richard (Xuxin) Shao, as Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge,
that:

|1. | the Periodic 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 Periodic Report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.

| | By: | /s/ Richard (Xuxin) Shao
| | --- | ------------------------
| |     | Richard (Xuxin) Shao    
| |     | President & CFO         
| |     |                         
| |     | Date: February 29, 2008 

---
22

                                EXHIBIT 99



      CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 of Norfolk Southern Railway
Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Norfolk Southern Railway Company.



                              Signed: /s/ David R. Goode

                                    David R. Goode
                                    President and Chief Executive
                                    Officer
                                    Norfolk Southern Railway Company

                              Dated: August 8, 2002



I certify, to the best of my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002 of Norfolk Southern Railway
Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Norfolk Southern Railway Company.



                              Signed: /s/ Henry C. Wolf

                                    Henry C. Wolf
                                    Vice President
                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                    Norfolk Southern Railway Company

                              Dated: August 8, 2002
**Exhibit 31(a)**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

**OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Richard K. Davidson, certifythat: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Union PacificRailroad Company; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of 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 financialinformation 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(s) and I are responsible for establishingand 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 ensurethat 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 controlsand 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 internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. 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 the registrant’sboard 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 andreport financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: August 6, 2004
AeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

July 31, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Request for Amendment to Exemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. FAA–2015–1641 under 

Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”) and 14 

C.F.R. Part 11, AeroUAVs, LLC (AeroUAVs), seeks to amend exemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. 

FAA–2015–1641; Submitted by AeroUAVs for review April 20, 2015 and subsequently granted by the 

FAA on July 27, 2015. 

The original exemption made a request to allow operations for:

 Aerial Photography and Videography for the real estate, construction, and utilities industries 

 Agricultural Surveying and Application 

 sUAS Operator Training 

 Product Demonstrations 

 Research and Development

There have been no changes in the request for exemption from specific regulations or conditions and 

reasons relative to public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption.

This letter requests the addition of Closed-set filming for the motion picture and television industry to

the aforementioned service operations. 

Accompanying this submission electronically via e-mail is a copy of the AeroUAVs Motion Picture and 

Television Flight Operations manual (MPTOM) as required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, 

Section 1 to 333exemptions@faa.gov. 

Regards,

Timothy Ford

President and CEO

AeroUAVs, LLC

11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353

Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

(314) 397-1110
* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 8, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-10581 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DAVID RAY WALLACE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:02-CR-328-ALL-R

-------------------- Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * David Ray Wallace appeals from his jury-trial conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e). Wallace argues that the district court erred in finding that he consented to a search of his person. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, supports the district court’s findings and denial of Wallace’s motion to suppress. See United States v.No. 03-10581 -2- Shelton , 337 F.3d 529, 532, petition for cert. filed , 72 U.S.L.W. 3393 (U.S. Nov. 24, 2003) (No. 03-781). Wallace further argues that the district court erred in enhancing his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). This court reviews the issue de novo. See United States v. MartinezCortez , 988 F.2d 1408, 1410 (5th Cir. 1993). The presentence report reveals that Wallace had three convictions for aggravated robbery which served as predicate offenses for the sentence enhancement. See United States v. Munoz , 150 F.3d 401, 419 (5th Cir. 1998). The district court did not err. Finally, Wallace challenges the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). He concedes that his argument is foreclosed by circuit precedent. This court has repeatedly held that the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is not open to question. United States v. Daugherty , 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.