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

No. 26765.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 20, 1954.

No attorney on appeal, for appellant.

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

MORRISON,/Judge.

The offense is the possession of whiskey for the purpose of sale in a dry area, with prior convictions alleged to enhance the punishment; the punishment, 365 days in jail and a fine of $500.

This is a companion case to Wynn v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 263 S.W.2d 566.

In this case, as in- the Wynn case, .the. trial court refused the requested charge on circumstantial evidence. In so- doing, he fell info error, and for such error, the judgment is reversed' and the cause remanded.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1468

LASZLO GEORGE PALMAI,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JOSEPH CAMMARATA; GERALD B. LEE, Judge;

GILBERT K. DAVIS & ASSOCIATES,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District

Judge. (CA-97-100-A)

Submitted: July 24, 1997 Decided: August 6, 1997

Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Laszlo George Palmai, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Cammarata, Washington, D.C.; Gregory E. Lucyk, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia; Henry St. John Fitzgerald, Arlington,

Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order granting Defendants' motions to dismiss Appellant's complaint for lack of

subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1).

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Palmai v. Cammarata, No. CA-97-100-A (E.D.

Va. Mar. 26, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Diagnostic Radiology Study Section, October 16, 2000, 8 am to October 17, 2000, 5 pm, Georgetown Holiday Inn, 2101 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20007 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on October 5, 2000, 65 FR 59454-59456.                

The meeting will be held at the Georgetown Suites, 1111 30th Street, NW, Washington, DC. The dates and time remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: October 6, 2000.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 00-26578  Filed 10-16-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended on March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) and to which this certification is furnished as an exhibit, I, Robert E. Lowder, the principal executive officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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) 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: May 5, 2005



/s/    ROBERT E. LOWDERRobert E. Lowder Chairman of the Boardand Chief Executive Officer




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. and will be retained by The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
----

**SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION**

**AMARC RESOURCES LTD.  (the "Company")**

  Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned  officers of the Company, do hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge,  that:

-   the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended March      31, 2004 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and         
-  the information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents,      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations      of the Company. 

| Date: July 26, 2004 

/s/ Ronald W. Thiessen          Ronald W. Thiessen          Director and Chief Executive Officer | Date: July 26, 2004

/s/ Jeffrey R. Mason        Jeffrey R. Mason        Director, Chief Financial Officer, and Secretary |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----
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 Form 10-QSB of
Worldwide Biotech & Pharmaceutical Company (the Company) on Form 10-QSB
for the quarter ending June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peiyi Tian , Principal Accounting 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 the best of my knowledge and
belief:

| | (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 result of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                   |                                                       
|------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------
|Date: Nov 14, 2005 | /s/ Peiyi Tian
Peiyi Tian
Principal Accounting Officer

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or
otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
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.
#### JACKSON v. STATE.

No. 22645.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 8, 1943.

Aubrey Davee, of Brady, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

The conviction is for possessing intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale in a dry area, the punishment being a fine of $200.

The record comes to this court without a. statement of facts or bills of exception. In such condition, nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 200 (Monday, October 16, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 61209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26493]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice No. 3433]


Shipping Coordinating Committee; Notice of Meeting

    The U.S. Shipping Coordinating Committee (SHC) will conduct an open 
meeting at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, November 8, 2000, in Room 6319 at U.S. 
Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC. The 
purpose of this meeting is to report the results of the Eighty-Second 
Session of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Legal 
Committee (LEG 82) and the results of the meeting of the Joint 
International Maritime Organization/International Labor Organization Ad 
Hoc Expert Working Group on Liability and Compensation Regarding Claims 
for Death, Personal Injury and Abandonment of Seafarers (IMO/ILO Ad Hoc 
Expert Working Group).
    At LEG 82, the Legal Committee will continue work on a draft 
protocol to the Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of 
Passengers and Their Luggage by Sea, and on the draft Wreck Removal 
Convention. The Committee will also consider a proposal to increase the 
limits of compensation under the 1992 protocols to the 1969 
International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage 
and the 1971 International Convention on the Establishment of an 
International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage. The Legal 
Committee will then turn its attention to the implementation of the 
International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in 
Connection With the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by 
Sea, and time will also be allotted to address any other issues on the 
Legal Committee's work program on which there are questions or 
comments.
    The IMO/ILO Ad Hoc Expert Working Group continue to examine the 
issue of financial security for seafarers and their dependents with 
regard to compensation in cases of personal injury, death and 
abandonment. During this meeting, the group will review and analyze 
information received in response to a questionnaire sent to member 
states.
    Members of the public are invited to attend the SHC meeting up to 
the seating capacity of the room. For further information, or to submit 
views in advance of the meeting, please contact Captain Joesph F. Ahern 
or Lieutenant Daniel J. Goettle, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Maritime 
and International Law (G-LMI), 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20593-0001; telephone (202) 267-1527; fax (202) 267-4496.

    Dated: October 10, 2000.
Stephen M. Miller,
Executive Secretary, Shipping Coordinating Committee.
[FR Doc. 00-26493 Filed 10-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

JOSEPH ALLEN,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 432 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-4350

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ROBERT EDWARD WILLIAMS, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District

Judge. (CR-04-70001)

Submitted: November 2, 2005 Decided: November 15, 2005

Before TRAXLER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph A. Sanzone, SANZONE & BAKER, P.C., Lynchburg, Virginia, for

Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, Jennie L. M.

Waering, Assistant United States Attorney, Sarah J. Beatty, ThirdYear Practice Law Student, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*

The sentence was imposed after the Supreme Court’s decision

in United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), and the district

court properly applied the Sentencing Guidelines in an advisory

manner.

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Robert Edward Williams, Jr., appeals the sentence imposed

following his conviction for altering money orders in violation of

18 U.S.C. §§ 500, 2 (2000); forging securities in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 513(a), 2 (2000); credit card fraud in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 1029(a), 2 (2000); mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§§ 1341, 2 (2000); and conspiracy to commit mail fraud in violation

of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2000). Williams was sentenced to fifty-one

months of imprisonment and ordered to pay $82,833.55 in

restitution.* Williams alleges that the district court erred in

including a debt of $17,687.71 on a First USA credit card in the

calculation of the amount of loss under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

Manual § 2B1.1 (2004) because the evidence was insufficient to

support a finding of fraud as to that amount. For the reasons that

follow, we affirm.

In fraud cases, the Government bears the burden of

proving the amount of loss for sentencing purposes by a

preponderance of evidence. United States v. Pierce, 409 F.3d 228,

234 (4th Cir. 2005). With respect to sentencing, the district

court makes a “reasonable estimate of the loss, given the available

information.” United States v. Miller, 316 F.3d 495, 503 (4th Cir.

2003). Here, the Government met its burden by introducing
- 3 -

documentary evidence regarding the amount of loss from First USA,

and establishing through testimonial evidence the connection

between the losses sustained and Williams’s use of the credit card

at issue. The district court fairly relied on this information in

its assessment of the loss amount. We therefore find that a

preponderance of evidence supports the Government’s allegation

regarding the amount of loss, and that the district court did not

make an unreasonable estimate of the loss.

We affirm the judgment of the district court. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SEC FORM 
10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                          17,984
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  173,157
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (2,271)
<INVENTORY>                                    192,731
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,006,314
<PP&E>                                         231,240
<DEPRECIATION>                                (130,198)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,149,317
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          249,355
<BONDS>                                        381,963
<COMMON>                                       166,454
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     326,096
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,149,317
<SALES>                                        780,737
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               780,737
<CGS>                                          689,029
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  689,029
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                66,168
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,545
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 25,540
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,150
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,390
<DISCONTINUED>                                   5,068
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    20,252
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61
        

</TABLE>
Order entered January 17, 2023

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 22
- 01000
- CV
AMY E. EDWARDS , Appellant

V.
DALCOR SKYLINE LTD. D/B/A SKYLINE , Appellee On Appeal fro m the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 22
- 03182
- E

O RDER The record before the Court reflects that appellant has filed for bankruptcy. This automatically suspends further action in this appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 8.2. Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal. I t may be reinstated on prompt motion by any party complying with Rule 8.3 and specifying what further action, if any, is required from this Court. See id . 8.3.
/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          40,720
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,010
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     54,963
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         241,267
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           238,632
<LOANS>                                        467,096
<ALLOWANCE>                                      8,423
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 840,052
<DEPOSITS>                                     563,142
<SHORT-TERM>                                   125,643
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             48,950
<LONG-TERM>                                     19,586
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,489
<COMMON>                                         7,867
<OTHER-SE>                                      72,375
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 840,052
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 22,490
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               10,184
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   213
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                32,887
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               6,820
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,738
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           22,149
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,381
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 17,583
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,320
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,096
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,096
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.60
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    6.25
<LOANS-NON>                                        987
<LOANS-PAST>                                       130
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    155
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,003
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    1,162
<RECOVERIES>                                       200
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                8,423
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,978
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          3,445
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60479]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26031]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application To Withdraw From Listing 
and Registration; (Citizens First Financial Corp., Common Stock, $0.01 
Par Value) File No. 1-14274

October 4, 2000.
    Citizens First Financial Corp., a Delaware corporation 
(``Company''), has filed an application with the Securities and 
Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to section 12(d) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 12d2-2(d) 
thereunder,\2\ to withdraw its Common Stock, $.01 par value 
(``Security''), from listing and registration on the American Stock 
Exchange LLC (``Amex'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(d).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2(d).
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Company has effected a new listing for its Security on the 
National Market of the Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. (``Nasdaq''). On 
October 2, 2000, the Company filed a Registration Statement on Form 8-A 
with the Commission in conjunction with the new Nasdaq listing. Trading 
in the Security on the Nasdaq commenced, and was concurrently suspended 
on the Amex, at the opening of business on October 2, 2000. The Company 
believes that trading in the Nasdaq marketplace will improve the 
liquidity of its Security by increasing its exposure among investors.
    The Company's application relates solely to the withdrawal of the 
Security from listing and registration on the Amex and shall have no 
effect upon the Security's continued listing on the Nasdaq and 
registration under section 12(g) of the Act.\3\
    Any interested person may, on or before October 26, 2000, submit by 
letter to the Secretary of the Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 
Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549-0609, facts bearing upon 
whether the application has been made in accordance with the rules of 
the Amex and what terms, if any, should be imposed by the Commission 
for the protection of investors. The Commission, based on the 
information submitted to it, will issue an order granting the 
application after the date mentioned above, unless the Commission 
determines to order a hearing on the matter.
For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to 
delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(1).

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26031 Filed 10-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-M