alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Mike GARCIA, appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, appellee.

No. 24506.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 16, 1949.

None on appeal.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was indicted for burglary with intent to commit theft.

In a proceeding which appears in all respects regular appellant waived a jury and entered his plea of guilty before the court. Appellant was upon said plea and evidence heard found guilty, and sentenced to the state penitentiary for not less than two nor more than three years.

Notwithstanding his said plea appellant perfected an appeal to the Court .of. Criminal Appeals.

He now by his personal affidavit requests that his said appeal be dismissed, and that the judgment of conviction stand as a final judgment.

At appellant’s request his appeal is dismissed.
#### BRADLEY v. STATE.

No. 24016.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 28, 1948.

*593No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for thé State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was charged by indictment with having been the operator of a truck with which he struck L. L. Snellgrove, thereby killing him, and that appellant failed to stop and render aid.

The court’s charge recites that appellant entered a plea of not guilty. The transcript contains the verdict of the jury finding appellant guilty and assessing his punishment at two years in the penitentiary, but nothing appears in the transcript showing that judgment on the verdict was ever entered, or that any sentence was ever pronounced against appellant. Both of these are required before an appeal may be taken, for without them there is no judgment from which to appeal. See Art. 769, Vernon’s Texas C.G.P., and cases , cited in Note 3 thereunder.

The appeal is dismissed.
EXHIBIT 8

Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 1 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 2 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 3 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 4 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 5 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 6 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 7 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 8 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 9 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 10 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 11 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 12 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 13 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 14 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 15 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 16 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 17 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 18 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 19 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 20 of 21
Case 6:20-cv-00533-ADA Document 46-15 Filed 03/05/21 Page 21 of 21
No. 72-1150.

#### Dallas Cabana, Inc., et al. *v.*Collier, Trustee in Bankruptcy.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5674 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Butane, 1-chloro. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2012 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on Butane, 1- 

chloro. 

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

3 SECTION 1. BUTANE, 1-CHLORO. 

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

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Butane, 1-chloro (CAS No. 

109–69–3) (provided for in 

subheading 2903.19.60) .... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5674 IH

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

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                      STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Enesco Group, Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarterly period ended November 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas
F. Bradley, the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify,
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
                  the operations of the Company.

November 13, 2003                     By: /s/ Thomas F.  Bradley
                                      --------------------------------------
                                      Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

                                       31
#### Sandra Aguglia et al., Respondents-Appellants, v Hills Department Stores, Inc., Appellant-Respondent.

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting plaintiffs’ expert to render an opinion on the question of whether defendant’s security personnel had "reasonable cause” to detain plaintiff, Sandra Aguglia, for suspected shoplifting *(see, Selkowitz v County of Nassau,*45 NY2d 97; *Dier v City of New York,*79 AD2d 596).

We reject defendant’s contention that plaintiffs failed to establish, as a matter of law, a causal connection between the incident and the aggravation of Sandra Aguglia’s preexisting "dry eye” condition. Plaintiffs’ expert testified that the incident was a proximate cause of the exacerbation of that plaintiff’s eye injury. Although defendant’s expert testified that there was no such causal connection, the issue was properly submitted to the jury for resolution. The weight to be accorded the conflicting testimony of experts is a matter particularly within the province of the jury *(see, Guzman v Saks Fifth Ave. Corp.,*141 AD2d 801).

The trial court properly refused to submit the issue of Sandra Aguglia’s alleged contributory negligence to the jury because the record contains no evidence "to support an inference of contributory fault” *(Conti v Mahoney,*137 AD2d 481, 482; *see, Hargraves v Agway Petroleum Corp.,*48 AD2d 763). Further, the trial court did not err in refusing to permit plaintiffs to amend the complaint to include a claim for punitive damages on the eve of trial or in denying plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint to conform to the proof, at the close of the evidence, to assert a claim for punitive damages.

We find that the jury verdict was not excessive since it did not "deviate * * * materially from what would be reasonable compensation” (CPLR 5501 [c]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining argument and find it to be without merit. (Appeals from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Forma, J.—false arrest.) Present— Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
#### Rafael Garcia ORTIZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27170.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 17, 1954.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

PER CURIAM.

The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, a fine of $200 and thirty days in jail.

The record on appeal contains no .statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented for review by this court.

The judgment is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                           65593
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  4728745
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    4964422
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              10491643
<PP&E>                                        24917526
<DEPRECIATION>                                  560223
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                37069363
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         11004038
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                       2500000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    14843937
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  37069363
<SALES>                                       10675862
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              11424857
<CGS>                                         10701361
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 11192941
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                255879
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              235701
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 231916
<INCOME-TAX>                                     88128
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             143788
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    143788
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

TY DOUGLAS GOSSETT,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 11

- 00228

- CR

Appeal from

432nd District Court

of Tarrant County, Texas

(TC # 1202379D)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2013.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Antcliff, JJ.

Antcliff, J., not participating
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          73,587
<SECURITIES>                                    25,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  309,605
<ALLOWANCES>                                    14,799
<INVENTORY>                                    234,901
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               646,555
<PP&E>                                       1,077,094
<DEPRECIATION>                                 616,369
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,569,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          350,413
<BONDS>                                        510,560
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        797
<COMMON>                                        10,915
<OTHER-SE>                                     575,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,569,103
<SALES>                                        766,786
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               766,786
<CGS>                                          620,928
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  728,502
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (4,936)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 2,862
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,070
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,150
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,070
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,080
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,080
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.56
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 99(a)

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

        Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Nautica Enterprises, Inc.
(the "Company") hereby certifies that:

        (i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for
the quarterly period ended November 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and

        (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


                                               By: s/ Harvey Sanders
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                   Harvey Sanders
                                                   Chief Executive Officer

Date:  January 10, 2003
     ------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              FEB-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAY-31-1999
<CASH>                                          68,354
<SECURITIES>                                     2,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,151
<INVENTORY>                                     17,184
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               127,238
<PP&E>                                          98,635
<DEPRECIATION>                                  64,081
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 204,998
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,894
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,613
<OTHER-SE>                                     157,233
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   204,998
<SALES>                                         35,430
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,430
<CGS>                                           21,791
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,791
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,942
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    40
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  77
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    262
<INCOME-TAX>                                        86
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                175
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       175
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01



</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Raymond Cloen, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s contention that his convictions were not supported by legally sufficient evidence. The victim’s testimony and a photograph of her scar established that she suffered physical injury *(see,*Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; *Matter of Philip A.,*49 NY2d 198; *People v Harper,*145 AD2d 933, 934). The victim’s testimony also established that defendant intended to assault her and that she owned the couch which was the subject of the criminal mischief charge. The police officer’s testimony was sufficient to sustain defendant’s conviction for resisting arrest. We also conclude that defendant’s convictions were supported by the weight of the evidence *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495). Defendant’s remaining arguments were not preserved for review *(see, People v Alfaro,*66 *870NY2d 985, 987; *People v Satloff,*56 NY2d 745) and we decline to reach them in the interest of justice.

All concur, except Lawton, J., who dissents in part and votes to modify, in accordance with the following memorandum.

Lawton, J.

(dissenting). I must dissent in part. Defendant was improperly convicted of two counts of burglary when there was but one illegal entry *(see, People v Martinez,*126 AD2d 942, *lv denied*69 NY2d 952; *People v McCray,*61 AD2d 860; *People v Perrin,*56 AD2d 957, 958). Although this issue was not preserved, in my opinion this court should exercise its discretion in the interest of justice (CPL 470.15 [6]) and dismiss one of the burglary counts to correct this fundamental constitutional error. No person should be convicted twice for the same crime *(see, People v Santiago,*51 AD2d 1, 8, n 5). (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, D’Amico, J.— burglary, first degree.) Present—Denman, J. P., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
|                                                                                  
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                  
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                    
|View History: Annual                                                              
|View History: Annual                                                              
|View History:                                                                     
|                                                                                  
|Texas Dry Natural Gas New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                  
|                                                                                  
|Texas Dry Natural Gas New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        | 683    | 929    |        |        |        | 373    | 245    | 477    | 422   
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 587    | 298    | 197    | 357    | 661    | 272    | 623    | 393    | 526    | 232   
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 734    | 580    | 365    | 383    | 312    | 340    | 253    | 535    | 178    | 425   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 122    | 425    | 187    | 606    | 191    | 27     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|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
## A ge nda

Public Meeting on the Physical Characterization of Grid

- Connected Commercial and Residential Buildings End

- Use Equipment and Appliances

July 11, 2014, 9:00 a.m.

- 1:00 p

. m

. (EST)

U.S. Department of Energy

Room 8E

- 089 1000 Independence Ave, SW Washington, DC 20585

To register for the meeting, email emily.marchetti@ee.doe.gov. In the email, please indicate your name, organization (if appropriate), citizenship, and contact information. For more information, see http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EERE

- 2014

- BT

- NOA

- 0016

- 0008

Time Topic Presenter

9:00 Welcome R oland Risser

, Director, DOE Building Technologies Office

9:15 Agenda Review and Ground Rules Facilitator

9: 2 0 Scope and Intent J oe Hagerman

, Senior Advisor, DOE /BTO

9:30 Public Comment Facilitator

Draft Framework Presentation and Discussion

9:45 Terminology and Grid

- Connected Equipment/Appliance Elements S cott Whalen , P acific

NW National Lab

10:00 Public Comment Facilitator

10:15 Physical Characterization Protocol Framework S cott Whalen, PNNL

10: 40 Public Comment Facilitator

1 1 : 10 Break

11: 20 Illustrative Example Rob Pratt, PNNL

11: 3 5 Public Comment Facilitator

12:00 Process for Developing Physical Characterization Protocols SriramTime Topic Presenter
Somasundaram, PNNL

12: 15 Public Comment Facilitator

12:30 Overvi ew of Questions for Public Comment Facilitator

12:3 5 Physical Characterization Capabilities at the Energy Systems Integration Facility Kevin Lynn , DOE/EERE

12: 50 Next Steps Joe Hagerman, DOE/BTO

01:00 Adjourn