alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## St at e of Ne w York Supre me Court , Appe llat e D i vi s i on T h i rd J udi cial D e

part me n t Decided and Entered: August 25, 2016 107137

________________________________ THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MEMORANDUM AND ORDER TERRY MACON, Also Known as TENNESSEE, Appellant.

________________________________ Calendar Date: August 18, 2016 Before: Garry, J.P., Egan Jr., Devine, Mulvey and Aarons, JJ.

__________ Salvatore Adamo, Albany, for appellant. D. Holley Carnright, District Attorney, Kingston (Joan Gudesblatt Lamb of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Garry, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Ulster County (Williams, J.), rendered February 4, 2014, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree. In satisfaction of a four-count indictment, defendant pleaded guilty to criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and waived his right to appeal. He was thereafter sentenced, in accord with the terms of the plea agreement, to five years in prison, to be followed by two years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.-2- 107137

Initially, we note that defendant's waiver of the right to appeal was valid. County Court explained that this right was separate from the other rights that defendant was forfeiting by pleading guilty and defendant communicated his understanding. He then proceeded to execute a detailed written waiver in open court after reviewing it with counsel. Thus, defendant is foreclosed by his valid waiver from challenging the severity of the sentence (see People v Miller, 137 AD3d 1485, 1485 [2016]; Matter of Rushlow, 137 AD3d 1482, 1483 [2016]). Defendant also challenges the voluntariness of his guilty plea. Although it is not precluded by his valid waiver of the right to appeal, this claim has not been preserved for our review, as the record does not reveal that he made an appropriate postallocution motion (see People v Blair, 136 AD3d 1105, 1106 [2016], lvs denied 27 NY3d 1066, 1072 [2016]; People v Walker, 135 AD3d 1244, 1244-1245 [2016]). Notably, defendant did not make any statements during the plea colloquy that cast doubt upon his guilt and thus trigger the narrow exception to the preservation requirement (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]; People v Walker, 135 AD3d at 1245). Further, defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel implicates the voluntariness of his guilty plea and, although it also survives his appeal waiver, likewise has not been preserved for our review, for the reason noted above (see People v Hughes, 134 AD3d 1301, 1302 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 966 [2016]; People v Bethea, 133 AD3d 1033, 1034 [2015], lv denied 27 NY3d 992 [2016]). Egan Jr., Devine, Mulvey and Aarons, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
### No. 06-1 4-00201--CR IN The Sixth Court of Appeals Texarkana, Texas

MARK VICTOR DHEIL,

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Atr:.F'eJ'J'ant,

Ag>p'eJ.Jee.
MOTION TO WITHDRAW PURSUANT TO ANDERSV. CALTFORNTA, 386 U. S. 738 (1'961 )

TO THE HONC)RABLESIXTH COURT OF APPEALS: NOW COMESJEFF

### T. JACKSON, 

### counsel 

### for /tppellant Mark 

### Victor Dh.eil, and hereby moves to withdraw f rom 

### representat-ion of Appellant pursuant Lo Anders v. 

### Cafifornia, 386 u.s. 738 (1961). In support of this motion, counsel shows 

### as follows:I.

counse-L 

### h;rsthoroughly reviewed 

### the reco::d

### on appeal, 

### and, f

### or t.hese 

### reasons, is thoroughly f

### amil-iar with the

Counse.I Ltas, in the exercj-se of his prof essionalr rrdr^rmant_ - cletermined that the instant case preSents no J uvYrrrvrr e / 

### nonfrivolouS 

### issuesfor appeal, 

### and, in accordlance 

### with the Supreme

### Court's decision in Anders

### v. CaLifornia, 386 U'S' 

### 738

### ftg67), now

### so advise 

### the court and reques;ts permission 

### to withdraw. .Anders, 

### id. at 144

-
In accordance III.

with Anders, counsel 1^^ ^ lId.D 7 contemporarLeouslywith this motion, filed a b::ief outlining alt issues which might arguably support an appeal and explaining whythose issues are meritless. An<Cers, Id. IV. counsel has furnished Appellant with a copy of said brief, and a (topy of this motion, thus appri:;ing Appellant 

### of counsel/'s 

### actions. counsel 

### has

### also furnished Appellant 

### wit.h 

### the reco::d 

### on appeal and 

### inst.ructions orlL f

### iling a Pro SeAppellant' 

### s Bri-ef

"V.

Having determined that the instant appeal is who1ly frivolous, and having complied with the briefing and notice requirements of Anders v. Cafifornia, counsel- now requests t.hat. he be allowed t.owithdraw, pursuant to Anc{ers.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, 

### it is priayed 

### t'hat. the 

### court grant. 

### counsel's request. and 

### allow couosol 

### to withdraw 

### from

### this case, pursuant 

### to Anders

### v. Cal-ifornia,386 U'S' 

### 738 (1961)

.

SBOT

### No. 24069916 735-A Hwy259 N. 

### Kilgore, TX 15662 

### Phone: 903-65 4-3362 

### Fax: B1-1-887-4:333 

### Attorney 

### for APPeT-Lant, Mark

### Victor Dh.eiL Respectful 

### ly submit.ted,

JacksonCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE



### Pursuant

### to Tnx. 

### R. App. 

### P. 9.5, I certify that on 

### January 

### 26, 2OL5

### | a copy of t.his mot.ion 

### was 

### mailed via 

### first cl-ass 

### U.S. 

### mail, postaqe 

### prepaid, to the following: Micheal Jlmerson: Rusk C()unt.y 

### District AttorneY SBOT: 00189406 1-15 

### N. Main St. Henderson, TX '75652 Mark

### Victor Dheil TDCJ

### No. 019651 61 SID 

### No. 0634 4918 

### Choice Moore Trans; f

### er Facility 17OO 

### N. FM 81 Bonham, TX 154IB

Jeff T. Jackson Af{-nrnarz Fnr Annol I rnl_ f1L U\JI.tlsy !vr nyll"
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 Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

DoD, DoDDS.

# ACTION:

Notice. 

On September 8, 2000, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Management Policy (ASD(FMP)), signed a memorandum to the Interim Director, Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA), changing DoD Directive 1342.12 “Eligibility Requirements for Education of Minor Departments in Overseas Areas,” dated July 8, 1982.

The change designates for enrollment on a space-available, tuition-free basis the class of dependents of NATO forces assigned to the NATO site at Larissa, Greece, excluding the host nation. This class waiver will be effective for school years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002, to the extent space is available, in order to allow sufficient time for the NATO command to explore other education options. This waiver will permit the enrollment of approximately 30 dependents of NATO forces. No Department of Defense (DoD) funds may be used to hire additional English as a Second Language instructors. Either the NATO forces or the NATO families must ensure the students are prepared for English language instruction.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

DoD Directive 1342.13, “Eligibility Requirements for Education of Minor Dependents in Overseas Areas,” dated July 2, 1982, is published at 32 CFR Pt. 71, and copies are available at cost from the National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, or the DoDEA web site: www.odedodea.edu. Questions can be addressed to DoDEA Attention: Ms. Gail Terres, 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203-1635.

Dated: October 12, 2000.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 00-26675  Filed 10-17-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-10-M
To: Federal Aviation Administration

From: Jesse Werle 

Subject: Petition to Amend Exemption No. 13612

Date: 30 November 2015 

This letter is to create an amendment to the current FAA Section 333 Exemption granted to Jesse Werle

granted on the 16 day of November 2015. The Exemption Number is 13612, and the Regulatory Docket 

No. FAA-2015-3761. I would like to amend the following airframes: 

Airframe Manual 

Inspire 1 http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/inspire_1/en/Inspire_1_User_Manual_v1.0_en.pdf

Phantom 3 

Professional

http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/phantom_3/en/Phantom_3_Professional_User_Manual_

v1.0_en.pdf

S900 http://dl.djicdn.com/downloads/s900/en/S900_User_Manual_v1.2_en.pdf

S1000 `http://download.djiinnovations.com/downloads/s1000/en/S1000_User_Manual_v1.00_en.pdf

Iris+ https://3drobotics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/IRIS-Operation-Manual-v6.pdf

3DR x8 https://3drobotics.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/RTF-X8-Manual-V2.pdf

Allowing these aircraft to be amended to the current 333 request would allow us to expand to a more 

useful service. The Inspire one will be used to fly high-end Real-Estate missions, while the Phantom 3 is 

used for the lower-end Real-Estate production. The s900 and s1000 are also used to film large ranches, 

and film high value targets. These could include ranches, estates, historical monuments, and events. The 

iris+ as well as the x8 are examples for our sensory platforms. Both machines allow us to carry different 

sensor platforms that we develop, and aid in future development.
Exhibit 32.1



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 of Sequa Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Martin Weinstein, Chief Executive 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.







/s/ Martin Weinstein

Martin Weinstein

Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer





Dated:  August 2, 2007
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2632 

To amend section 399Z–1 of the Public Health Service Act to extend for 

5 years the authorization of appropriations for operational grants under 

the school-based health centers program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 9, 2013 

Mrs. CAPPS (for herself, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. RANGEL, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. SARBANES, Ms. 

BROWNLEY of California, Mr. FARR, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. LEVIN, Ms. 

DELAURO, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. POLIS, Mr. HONDA, and Ms. ESTY) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend section 399Z–1 of the Public Health Service Act 

to extend for 5 years the authorization of appropriations 

for operational grants under the school-based health centers program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘School-based Health 

5 Centers Program Reauthorization Act of 2013’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2632 IH

1 SEC. 2. 5-YEAR EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPRO2 PRIATIONS FOR OPERATIONAL GRANTS 

3 UNDER THE SCHOOL-BASED HEALTH CEN4 TERS PROGRAM. 

5 Section 399Z–1(l) of the Public Health Service Act 

6 (42 U.S.C. 280h–4(l)) is amended by striking ‘‘through 

7 2014’’ and inserting ‘‘through 2019’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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
 
 In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Lingo Media Corporation (the “Registrant”) for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby 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 annual report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
 
 2.
The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
 
 Date: July 15, 2011
 
 /s/ Michael KraftMichael Kraft

President & Chief Executive Officer
 
 This written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F. A signed original of this 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.
 
 This certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2668 

To delay the application of the individual health insurance mandate. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 11, 2013 

Mr. YOUNG of Indiana (for himself, Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mrs. BLACK, Mr. CAMP, Mr. KELLY of 

Pennsylvania, Mr. NUNES, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. REICHERT, 

Mr. SCHOCK, Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. RENACCI, Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. REED, 

Mr. TIBERI, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. PAULSEN, Mr. ROSKAM, Ms. 

JENKINS, Mr. SMITH of Nebraska, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, 

and Mrs. BLACKBURN) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To delay the application of the individual health insurance 

mandate. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fairness for American 

5 Families Act’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2668 IH

1 SEC. 2. DELAY IN APPLICATION OF INDIVIDUAL HEALTH 

2 INSURANCE MANDATE. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5000A(a) of the Internal 

4 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘2013’’ and 

5 inserting ‘‘2014’’. 

6 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

7 (1) Section 5000A(c)(2)(B) of the Internal Rev8 enue Code of 1986 is amended— 

9 (A) by striking ‘‘2014’’ in clause (i) and 

10 inserting ‘‘2015’’, and 

11 (B) by striking ‘‘2015’’ in clauses (ii) and 

12 (iii) and inserting ‘‘2016’’. 

13 (2) Section 5000A(c)(3)(B) of such Code is 

14 amended— 

15 (A) by striking ‘‘2014’’ and inserting 

16 ‘‘2015’’, and 

17 (B) by striking ‘‘2015’’ (prior to amend18 ment by subparagraph (A)) and inserting 

19 ‘‘2016’’. 

20 (3) Section 5000A(c)(3)(D) of such Code is 

21 amended— 

22 (A) by striking ‘‘2016’’ and inserting 

23 ‘‘2017’’, and 

24 (B) by striking ‘‘2015’’ and inserting 

25 ‘‘2016’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2668 IH

1 (4) Section 5000A(e)(1)(D) of such Code is 

2 amended— 

3 (A) by striking ‘‘2014’’ and inserting 

4 ‘‘2015’’, and 

5 (B) by striking ‘‘2013’’ and inserting 

6 ‘‘2014’’. 

7 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

8 this section shall take effect as if included in section 1501 

9 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
1 NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. JESUS GALLARZO, Jr., AKA Jesse Lopez, AKA Wino,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 15

- 50415
D.C. No. 2:14

- cr - 00666

- DDP
- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dean D. Pregerson, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted August 7, 2017 Pasadena, California
Before: REINHARDT, KOZINSKI, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. 1. “Outrageous government conduct is not a defense, but rather a claim that government conduct in securing an indictment was so shocking to due process values that the indictment must be dismissed.” United States v. Williams , 547 F.3d

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3. 

# FILED

AUG 18 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S1187, 1199 (9th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted). Dismissal is “limited to extreme

cases in which the government’s conduct violates fundamental fairness.” United
States v. Gurolla , 333 F.3d 944, 950 (9th Cir. 2003) . Outrageousness is an “extremely high standard” that can only be met by conduct “so grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice.” United States v. Hullaby , 736 F.3d 1260, 1262 (9th Cir. 2013) (citation omitted). The gov ernment conduct in this case did not reach that level.
2. A district court may exercise its supervisory powers “to remedy a constitutional or statutory violation; to protect judicial integrity by ensuring that a conviction rests on appropriate considerations validly before a jury; or to deter future illegal conduct.” United States v. Stinson , 647 F.3d 1196, 1210 (9th Cir. 2011) (citation omitted). In this case, t he district court had no grounds for exercising its supervisory powers of dismissal and thus properly declined to do so.
3. “ Generally, any delay between the commission of a crime and an indictment is limited by the statute of limitations. ” United States v. Corona

Verbera , 509 F.3d 1105, 1112 (9th Cir. 2007) . The pre

- indictment delay here was 28 months, well within the five

- year statute of limitations. To demonstrate that due process nevertheless requires dismissal due to delay within the statute of limitations, a defendant must first “ prove that he suffered actual, non

- specul ativeprejudice from the delay, meaning proof that demonstrates exactly how the loss of

evidence or witnesses was prejudicial. ” United States v. Barken , 412 F.3d 1131, 1134 (9th Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). This burden “ is heavy and is rarely met. ”
Id. “ Generalized assertions of the loss of memory, witnesses, or evidence are
insuff icient to establish actual prejudice. ” United States v. Manning , 56 F.3d 1188, 1194 (9th Cir. 1995). The district court correctly found that Gallarzo did not make an adequate offer of proof that he suffered prejudice

. 4. T he district court did not err in dec lining to reconsider these pretrial rulings.
AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 32.1


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of 99 Cent Stuff,
Inc. (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Periodic
Report"), I, Raymond Zimmerman, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge the Periodic Report
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 Periodic Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

Date: April 11, 2006                              /s/ Raymond Zimmerman
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                      Raymond Zimmerman
                                                      Chief Executive 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
required by Section 906, has been provided to 99 Cent Stuff and will be retained
by 99 Cent Stuff and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

The foregoing certification is provided solely for purposes of complying with
the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**NORTHERN GROWERS, LLC**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIALOFFICER PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

 

The undersigned,Robert Narem, the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer ofNorthern Growers, LLC (the “Company”), has executed this Certification inconnection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of theCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,2009 (the “Report”).

 

The undersignedhereby certifies that:

 

·                  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

·                  the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

IN WITNESSWHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certification as of the 31st day ofMarch, 2010.

 

 
|   | /s/  Robert Narem                                    |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Robert Narem                                         |
|   | Chief Executive Officer  and Chief Financial Officer |

 

1

----
New Mexico Regional Haze State Implementation Plan Revisions September 5, 2013

NM064-03-29 Public Comments Received by the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board

NM064-03-30 EarthJustice/Western Environmental Law Center – September 3, 2013 NM064-03-31 Alex J. and Felicity B. Gonzales – August 19, 2013 NM064-03-32 EDL Consulting – August 23, 2013

NM064-03-33 Irvin & Norma Jean Jones – undated NM064-03-34 Robert E. Reed – August 26, 2013



### ***********************************end*****************************************