alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 The Honorable Ralph Erickson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 09-1388

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * District of North Dakota. * Michael Alan Petzold, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: February 2, 2010 Filed: February 5, 2010

___________ Before BYE, RILEY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Mich ael Petzold challenges the sentence imposed by the district court 1 after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy, murder, and related charges. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Petzold pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement that contained a waiver of his right to appeal his sentence. We will enforce the appeal waiver here.-2- See United States v. Andis , 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Ci r. 2003) (en banc) (court should enforce appeal waiver and dismiss app eal where it falls within scope of waiver, both plea agreement and waiver were entered into knowingly and voluntarily, and no miscarriage of justice would result). Petz old’s argument on appeal falls within the scope of the appeal waiver, the reco rd shows the requisite knowledge and voluntariness, and we see nothing to suggest that a miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the appeal waiver. See United States v. Michelsen , 141 F.3d 867, 871- 72 (8th Cir. 1998) (appeal waiver is enfo rceable so long as it resulted from knowing and voluntary decision; examining personal characteristics of defendant and circumstances surrounding plea agr eement when assessing knowledge and voluntariness of waiver). Having reviewed the record indepe ndently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988) for any nonfrivolous issues not covered by the waiver, we find none. Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw and we dismiss the appeal.

______________________________
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7006

KEVIN SMITH, a/k/a Bar-None-Royal Blackness,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RICHARD ROUSE; TERRELL CANNON, SR.; T. HALL;

VAUGHN JACKSON; BOBBY RUTHERFORD; LAURIE

BESSINGER,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Patrick Michael Duffy, District

Judge. (CA-96-1900-0-23BD)

Submitted: January 27, 1998 Decided: April 20, 1998

Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Smith, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies as frivolous under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)

(West Supp. 1997). The district court properly required exhaustion

of administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1997e(a) (West Supp.

1997). Because Appellant did not demonstrate to the district court

that he had exhausted administrative remedies, the court's dismissal of the action was not an abuse of discretion. We therefore

affirm the district court's order but modify it to reflect that the

dismissal is without prejudice to Appellant's right to refile the

action after exhaustion. 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 AS MODIFIED
EXHIBIT 99.1 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON Officers Certificate
  February 20, 2014 MERRILL LYNCH DEPOSITOR, INC.
     One Bryant Park 
4th Floor  Structured Credit Trading

    New York, New York
10036 PREFERREDPLUS, PPLUS
TRUST AND INDEXPLUS CERTIFICATE The undersigned, James W.P. Hall,
Vice President of The Bank of New York Mellon  (formerly The Bank of New York), a New York corporation  (the Trustee), hereby
certifies in such capacity that, based on his knowledge, the Trustee has complied, in all
material respects, with all conditions and covenants applicable to the Trustee under the
Standard Terms for Trust Agreements dated February 20, 1998 between Merrill Lynch
Depositor, Inc. as depositor (the Depositor) and the Trustee, as successor to United
States Trust Company of New York, as trustee and securities intermediary (the Securities
Intermediary), in each case as amended by a series supplement between the Depositor, the
Trustee and the Securities Intermediary for each trust series listed in the attached
schedule. Very truly yours,
The Bank of New York Mellon (formerly



The Bank of New York), as TrusteeBy:
      /s/
      James W.P. HallName:
      James W.P. HallTitle:
      Vice President    
 
 SCHEDULE INDEXPLUS Trust Series 2003-1  PPLUS Trust Series GSC-1
     PPLUS Trust Series GSC-2 PPLUS Trust Series GSG-2
    PPLUS Trust Series
JPM-1 PreferredPLUS Trust Series CZN-1  PreferredPLUS Trust
Series FAR-1  PreferredPLUS Trust Series QWS-1 
    PreferredPLUS Trust Series QWS-2  PreferredPLUS Trust Series VER-1
#### Ex parte MARKS.

No. 22287.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 21, 1942.

Shelton & Shelton, of Austin, and Byron Matthews and Will R. Parker, both of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Forrester Hancock, Dist. Atty., and Fred L. Wilson, Asst. Dist. Atty., both of Waxahachie, and Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

The relator brings this case on appeal from the District Court of Ellis County, in which he sought a reduction of his appeal bond from eight thousand dollars to two thousand five hundred dollars. The bond was sought in connection with an appeal to this court in cause No. 21,854, Marks v. State, 164 S.W.2d 690. He had previously sought a reduction of bail and this court affirmed the action of the trial court in fixing bail at eight thousand dollars. See Ex parte Marks, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 489, 54 S.W.2d 851. Relator subsequently obtained another writ of habeas corpus seeking a reduction of said appeal bond, and upon reduction still being refused by the district court relator appealed in this present proceeding.

The judgment of conviction in cause No. 21,854 was affirmed prior to the adjournment of court in June, 1942, and a motion for rehearing therein on behalf of appellant was overruled on October 14, 1942.

The State, by a motion to dismiss the appeal, calls attention to the facts heretofore recited, which shows that the question here sought to be passed upon is moot by reason of the final judgment of conviction in cause No. 21,854.

The State’s motion is granted and the appeal herein is dismissed.
14910.13-PI e, <. '1"''''''-''' ,,,,. ,',",.'"

14 C"frR Part 3!J 

### DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Fed~r.alAviation Administration



# {)/1'b [Docket No. l"AA_2010_HH1I'; 

### Directorate Identifier 2010-NM-O.J9-AD; 

# I/_Z.:Z'-l -OfJ-ILj Amendment 

### :.V)-,,~

••• ;AD 2010-*"'-**1 

### RIN 2120-AAM Airworthines8 Directives; Bombardier, Tnc.Model 

### CL-oOQ·2BI9 (Regionl:ll Jel 

### Series 100 &440) I\irplnncg AGENCY: Feder:a.l.t\viallon Administration (FAA), Department ofTwnsportation 

### (DOT). ACTION: Final rule; request for comments. 

### SUMMARY; We are adopting <lnew airworthiness diredive (AD) rOJ'the product:; 1i5ted 

# CC~

,

# ..,,, 

### above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MeAl) originated hy an aviation 

### amhority of

### ,mother CQunuy to identify nnd

### correct an unsafe conditi~m on an aviation product. The 

### MeAl dcscribc$ the 

### UTt."afe condition as: The manufacturer has informed Traosport Canada that, a 

### ccrL.,in number ()f the resolver 

### st:1tors, which were installed in tbe 

### ADA (angle of attackl trnnsducers. were not cleaned ~oITectly, Thi$ condition call degmoe the /l.OA transducer pClfoollanee allow tempemture-.5 resulting in frccz.ing of the AOA transducer resolver. which may provide inaccurate AOA data {et 

### (he Stall ProtL'Ctioll 

### System (SPS)_ 

### Ifnot corrected, this condition can result in early or late activation of the stick shakcr and/or sljck plJsher.
rhis AD requires actions thal arc intended to address the unsafe condition described in the 

### MeAl, 

## I,J \ \ 

# z.. ~ 

# to """M" ",,", AUN\ -(0 

# I
EXHIBIT 23
**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**
We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.333-114127, 333-103713 and 33-66474 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No.333-02271 on Form S-3 of EnergySouth, Inc. of our report dated November 25,2003, except as to the matters discussed in Note 12 for which the date is May14, 2004, (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes anexplanatory paragraph referring to the Company’s reclassification of the losson early extinguishment of debt from extraordinary to ordinary income for theyear ended September 30, 2001), appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/Aof EnergySouth, Inc. for the year ended September 30, 2003.  /s/ Deloitte & Touche LLPDeloitte & Touche LLPAtlanta, GeorgiaMay 14, 2004
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.1 CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP The Board of Directors and Stockholders
AmerUs Group Co. We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-20905, 333-20907, 333-32201, 333-32203, 333-40065,
333-63895, 333-72237, 333-91493, 333-50030, 333-101961, 333-106124 and
333-106572) pertaining to various employee benefit plan filings and in the
Registration Statements (Form S-3 Nos. 333-50249, 333-72643, 333-88794 and
333-103347 ) of AmerUs Group Co. and in the related Prospectuses of our reports
dated February 6, 2004 with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedules of AmerUs Group Co. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2003. /s/Ernst & Young LLP Des Moines, Iowa
March 11, 2004
**Exhibit 32.2**

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

In connection withthe Annual Report of AXT, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K forthe year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: March 23, 2007 |     | By:      |     | /s/ WILSON W.  CHEUNG      |
|---------------------------|----------|----------|----------|----------------------------|
|                      |     |     |     | Wilson W. Cheung           |
| * *                  | * * | * * | * * | *Chief  Financial Officer* |

 

----
#### HOOKS v. STATE.

No. 23764.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 4, 1947.

No appearance for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted on a charge of misdemeanor theft, and his punishment assessed at one year in the county jail.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. Nothing is presented for the consideration of this court.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
#### Ex parte COOK.

No. 24493.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 22, 1949.

None on appeal, for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

This is an application in which the matter was referred to the Honorable Langston G. King, Judge of Criminal District Court No. 2 of Harris County, Texas, with instructions to find the facts and return to this Court.

The only question presented is in the following language: “The Relator was deprived of Counsel for his defense, as an indigent person, contrary to the provisions of the 6th Amendment to the' Constitution of the Únited States.”

A hearing was held in accordance with the direction and Judge King certifies the regular procedure by which the relator was convicted and sentenced to 10 years in the State Penitentiary on a jury verdict. His finding concluded:

“The court further finds as a fact that Cook was not represented by counsel in his *611trial, not being eligible for a suspended sentence and pleading ‘not guilty’. However, he was not denied counsel;

“Further, Cook was not denied process for witnesses in his behalf, and this court is not certifying that in said trial Cook was denied any constitutional or statutory .right under the law, in that he was not deprived of counsel to represent him or witnesses to testify in his behalf.”

Based on the foregoing facts certified to this Court, the relator’s petition is denied and he is remanded to the custody of the manager and warden of the State Penitentiary to serve such remaining portion of his sentence as the law has imposed upon him.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                  Exhibit 3.2(b)
                                                                  --------------

         By-laws amendment adopted June 1, 1998

                  Section 3.01. Number of Directors. The number of directors
                                -------------------
         which shall constitute the entire Board of Directors shall not be less
         than three nor more than eleven. Subject to the foregoing limitation,
         the number of directors may be fixed from time to time by action of a
         majority of the entire Board of Directors or of the shareholders at an
         annual or special meeting, or, if the number of directors is not so
         fixed, the number shall be four.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 28, 2016

t1212 

# Order

Clerk December 28, 2016

153406 & (43)(47)

ALTICOR, INC.,

Plaintiff

- Appellant/

Cross

- Appellee,

v SC: 153406

COA: 323350

Ct of Claims: 12

- 000139

- MT

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Defendant

- Appellee/

Cross

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for leave to file brief amicus curiae is

GRANTED. The application for lea ve to appeal the February 9, 2016 judgment of the

Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as cross

- appellant are

considered, and they are DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions

presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4340

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

TERRELL JAMAR HOUSTON,

Defendant - Appellant.

On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States.

(S. Ct. No. 17-6520)

Decided on Remand: July 26, 2018

Before TRAXLER, AGEE* and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ross Richardson, Executive Director, Ann L. Hester, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF 

WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jill 

Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, Anthony J. Enright, Assistant United States 

Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, 

 * Judge Davis participated in the original decision but retired prior to the 

Supreme Court’s remand of the case and was replaced by Judge Agee.
2

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Terrell Jamar Houston entered a conditional guilty plea to possession of a firearm 

by a convicted felon , see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), reserving the right to appeal the district 

court’s denial of his motion to suppress. The district court sentenced Houston to 37 

months’ imprisonment. On appeal to this court, we held that the district court properly 

denied the motion to suppress based on our decision in United States v. Wellons, 32 F.3d 

117 (4th Cir. 1994). In Wellons, we held that a driver of a rental car who is not listed on 

the rental contract as an authorized driver has no expectation of privacy in the car or 

containers in the car and that the driver’s Fourth Amendment rights therefore were not 

violated by a warrantless search of the rental car and its contents. See id. at 119-20.

In Byrd v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1518 (2018), however, the Supreme Court held 

that “the mere fact that a driver in lawful possession or control of a rental car is not listed 

on the rental agreement will not defeat his or her otherwise reasonable expectation of 

privacy.” Id. at 1531. Because the Supreme Court’s decision in Byrd abrogated our 

decision in Wellons, the Court vacated our decision in this case and remanded for 

reconsideration in light of Byrd. Having considered the Supreme Court’s decision, we 

hereby vacate the decision of the district court and remand for further proceedings. The 

district court should consider the matter de novo in light of Byrd, and the parties are free 

to raise any newly relevant issues.

VACATED AND REMANDED
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5529 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain woven fabrics of synthetic 

filament yarn, including woven fabrics obtained from materials of heading 

5404, of yarns of different colors. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. YOUNG of Indiana introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain woven 

fabrics of synthetic filament yarn, including woven fabrics obtained from materials of heading 5404, of yarns 

of different colors. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN WOVEN FABRICS OF SYNTHETIC FILA4 MENT YARN, INCLUDING WOVEN FABRICS OB5 TAINED FROM MATERIALS OF HEADING 5404, 

6 OF YARNS OF DIFFERENT COLORS. 

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

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5529 IH

1 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

2 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Woven fabrics of synthetic 

filament yarn, including 

woven fabrics obtained 

from materials of heading 

5404, of yarns of different 

colors (provided for in subheading 5407.93.20) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

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

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

6 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**STOCKERYALE, INC. CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

        In connection with the Annual Report of    StockerYale, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed    with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Francis J.    O'Brien,    Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.    ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of the Company. 

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K   ("Item 601(b)(32)") promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and the Exchange Act. In accordance with   clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this Certification (A) shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject   to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or   the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
Date: May 14, 2004Name:/s/**                                                                                                 Francis J. O'Brien      Francis  J. O'Brien        Title:Chief                                                                                                 Financial                                                                                                 Officer                                                                                                 andTreasurer
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to StockerYale, Inc. and will be retained by StockerYale, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 Exhibit 32.2  /  STKR END2004 Form 10-Q
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 Pathmark Stores, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 4, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John T. Standley, 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 the best of my knowledge:(1)
        the 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 Report fairly represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.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 the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.








/s/ John T. StandleyName:
        
        John T. StandleyTitle:
        
        Chief Executive OfficerDate:
        
        September 12, 2007