alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________________________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A24A0253. RICHARD JOHNSTON v. THE STATE.

Richard Johnston appeals from his convictions for child molestation and

related crimes as well as the denial of his motion for new trial. We, however, lack

jurisdiction, and this appeal is therefore DISMISSED.

At trial in this case, the jury could not reach a verdict on one count of rape, and

the trial court declared a mistrial. The trial court subsequently entered an order

placing the rape count on the dead docket and entered a purported final judgment.

Our Supreme Court recently held, however, that when a count of the indictment is

dead-docketed, the case remains pending below, so the provisions of OCGA § 5-6-34

(a) (1) allowing a direct appeal from a final judgment do not apply. Seals v. State, 311

Ga. 739 (860 SE2d 419) (2021), overruled in part on other grounds by Gonzales v.

State, 315 Ga. 661 (884 SE2d 339) (2023). Rather, to pursue an appeal, the defendant

must follow the procedures for an interlocutory appeal under OCGA § 5-6-34 (b),

which Johnston did not do. See id. 

January 29, 2024
“Because [Johnston]’s case is pending below yet he failed to follow the

interlocutory appeal procedures, we must dismiss his appeal.” Spears v. State, 360

Ga. App. 776, 777 (861 SE2d 619) (2021).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

C l e r k ’ s O f f i c e ,

Atlanta,_______________________________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

01/29/2024
exv10w1



 







Exhibit 10.1









 





PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL




February 23, 2006




Name

Address




RE: Executive Deferred Compensation Program Dividend Adjustment




Dear_______:




Reference is made to our letter of February 2, 2006 whereby we advised you of the adjustment
that was made to your deferred units as a result of the $6 special dividend.



The purpose of this letter is to advise you that there will be a further adjustment forthcoming
to you in the amount of $___to fully recognize the $6 dividend. When we originally developed
the EDCP plan, the plan did not contemplate the paying of a special dividend. As a result, when
we adjusted the number of units for you, we were required under the terms and conditions of the
plan to make the adjustment using the formula outlined in our February 2, 2006 letter, which
resulted in you not receiving the full value of the $6 dividend in the same way that all other
Ameritrade shareholders have. For your reference, the method to adjust the number of units in
the plan to provide full value is $6/ (closing price — $6).



Because our plan does not allow for a discretionary stock award, the adjustment will be made in
the form of a cash bonus. This bonus will be paid to you on March 10, 2006, net of statutory
withholdings.



I trust the above meets with your satisfaction.



Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or require further
clarification.



Yours truly,




Karen Ganzlin
No. 12-15-00094-CR

MARCUS ANTHONY ESPARZA § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

 Appellant §

§

vs. § 12TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

§

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 Appellee

§

§ AT TYLER, TEXAS

MOTION TO WITHDRAW

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Now comes Austin Reeve Jackson, counsel for Appellant in the above entitled and 

numbered cause, and makes this Motion to Withdraw, and for good cause shows the following:

I.

Counsel was appointed to represent Appellant in the appeal of this matter. Having 

undertaken a diligent and thorough review of the record, counsel has concluded that, in his 

professional judgment, there exist no arguable grounds for reversible error. A copy of 

Appellant’s Brief filed pursuant to the requirements of Anders v. California, along with a copy of 

this Motion, has been served on Appellant who has also been informed of the right to file a pro 

se brief by 22 July 2015, the right object to this Motion, and the right to obtain a copy of records 

from counsel. Said notification was sent to Appellant by first class certified mail at:

Inmate 00624827

Byrd Unit

21 FM 247 

Huntsville, TX 77320

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, undersigned counsel respectfully prays 

that, in accordance with the applicable law, the Court grant this Motion to Withdraw and afford 

Appellant an opportunity to file a pro se brief in this matter. 

ACCEPTED

12-15-00094-CR

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

6/22/2015 10:39:12 AM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 6/22/2015 10:39:12 AM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Austin Reeve Jackson

Texas Bar No. 24046139

112 East Line, Suite 310

Tyler, TX 75702

Telephone: (903) 595-6070

Facsimile: (866) 387-0152

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was 

served on counsel for the State by efile. Further, a copy of this Motion was also served on 

Appellant by certified first class mail.

/s/ Austin Reeve Jackson
#### HOLBROOK v. STATE.

No. 26425.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 6, 1953.

No attorney on appeal for appellant.

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

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, a fine of $50.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception.

All the proceedings appearing regular and nothing being presented for our review, the judgmént of the trial court is affirmed. '
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER
SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Gary J. Blair, hereby certify that the
annual report on Form 10-K of the Registrant for the year
ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Registrant.



| |                    
| | -------------------
| | /s/ GARY J. BLAIR  
| |                    
| | Name: Gary J. Blair

| |        |                                                 
| | ------ | ------------------------------------------------
| | Title: | Executive Vice-President/Chief Financial Officer

Dated: March 23, 2004

Supplemental Information to be Furnished With
Reports Filed Pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act
by

Registrants Which Have Not Registered
Securities Pursuant to Section 12 of the Act


No proxy statement, form of proxy or other proxy
soliciting material has been, and it is not currently
anticipated that any such material will be, sent to more than
ten of the registrants security holders with respect any
annual or other meeting of security holders in 2004.

No annual report to security holders covering the
registrants fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 has
previously been sent to security holders, and it is not
currently anticipated that any such report other than this
Annual Report on Form 10-K will be sent to the
Registrants security holders.
EXHIBIT 10(b)19


 


BASE SALARIES OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS


 


ALABAMA POWER COMPANY


 


Effective as of March 1, 2006, the following are the annual base salaries of the Chief Executive Officer and certain other executive officers of Alabama Power Company (the “Company”).


 



	
            Charles D. McCrary

President and Chief Executive Officer
 	
            $615,000
 
	
            C. Alan Martin

Executive Vice President
 	
            $382,879
 
	
            Steven R. Spencer

Executive Vice President
 	
            $352,269
 
	
            Jerry L. Stewart

Senior Vice President
 	
            $321,807
 
	
            Art P. Beattie

Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and 

Treasurer
 	
            $249,860
EXHIBIT
32.B
  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 on Form 10-Q for the period ending
September 30, 2008 of Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (the “Company”)
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, John R. Sult, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Controller, certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
(ii) that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


/s/ John R. SultJohn
      R. SultSenior
      Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Controller(Principal
      Accounting and Financial Officer)Tennessee
      Gas Pipeline CompanyNovember
      7, 2008
























A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company and will be retained by Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                                         
<ARTICLE>                                 5                    
<LEGEND>                                                       
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>                                                      
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000    
                                                               
<S>                                        <C>            
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS                 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997          
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-30-1996           
<CASH>                                          35,777            
<SECURITIES>                                         0            
<RECEIVABLES>                                  279,540            
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,342             
<INVENTORY>                                    261,104             
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               642,767             
<PP&E>                                         706,664             
<DEPRECIATION>                                 383,121            
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,228,299             
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          267,290             
<BONDS>                                        152,186             
<COMMON>                                       205,437             
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0             
<PREFERRED>                                          0             
<OTHER-SE>                                     513,815             
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,228,299             
<SALES>                                              0             
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               917,281             
<CGS>                                                0             
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  526,247             
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0             
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0             
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,888             
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 72,310             
<INCOME-TAX>                                    23,139             
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             49,171            
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0             
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0             
<CHANGES>                                            0             
<NET-INCOME>                                    49,171             
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.50          
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.50
             
                                                               

</TABLE>
#### BARTLEY v. STATE.

No. 23790.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 12, 1947.

*601Earle S. Zucht and J. G. Hornberger, both of Laredo, for appellant.

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

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is robbery. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of -twenty years.

The record reflects that on the night of the 16th day of January, 1947, appellant did by assault and by putting Mary Hein and Albert Gutierrez in fear of life and bodily injury rob them of $338. Although he entered a plea of not guilty, nevertheless when he took the witness stand Tie admitted taking the money from the parties by making them believe he had a pistol in his coat pocket. He contended that at the time he was under the influence ■of narcotics self-administered.

Mary Hein and Albert Gutierrez both .testified that he came into the office where they were at work with his hand in his coat pocket and demanded that they give him the money; that they both were in fear for their lives and they told him the money was in the drawer whereupon he went to the drawer, took $338.05, and departed.

■ -The evidence is ample to support his -conviction. The court in his charge made a fair and adequate application of the law to the facts of the case to which no objection was made.

Appellant, by Bill of Exception No. 1, complains of the following remark made by the District Attorney in his argument to the jury: “That if this defendant had actually had a gun or other dangerous weapon with him at the time that the offense was committed, the offense would have been robbery by assault with a deadly weapon, for which the maximum penalty would be death.” At this juncture, appellant interposed his objéction to the argument on the ground that it inflamed the minds of the jury and was highly prejudicial. We see no merit in the bill since the argument was a reasonable deduction from the evidence.

No reversible error appearing in the record, 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.
| | Exhibit 99.1
| | ------------





|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 on Form 10-Q of Swank, Inc. (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report"), the undersigned each hereby certifies that: (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 presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Dated:  August 14, 2002 | /s/ John A. Tulin             
|----------------------- | ------------------------------
|                        |                               
|                        | John A. Tulin, President      
|                        | (Chief Executive Officer      
|                        |                               
|                        |                               
|Dated:  August 14,2002  | /s/ Jerold R. Kassner         
|                        |                               
|                        | Jerold R. Kassner, Senior Vice
|                        | President and Treasurer       
|                        | (Chief Financial Officer)
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



                                               Exhibit 99.2

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 Quarterly Report of The Stephan Co. (the "Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David Spiegel, Chief Financial 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 my knowledge:

(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.

/s/ David A. Spiegel
__________________________________
David A. Spiegel
Chief Financial Officer
May 15, 2003
#### WYATT v. STATE.

No. 23935.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 25, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

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

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

George Wyatt was convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for five years on a charge of robbery by assault.

*647The transcript shows a docket entry saying that appellant gave notice of appeal. This was not carried into the minutes of the court and, consequently, we have no jurisdiction of the case. Article 827, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.

The appeal is dismissed.
##### 



Second Amendment to Amended & Restated Outside Director Compensation Policy
(Adopted by Board of Directors March 2008)
    
    Exhibit 10.29.2
 CSK AUTO CORPORATION
 OUTSIDE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION POLICY
 A. Annual Stipend  Outside Directors.
 Amount and Form of Payment outside Company Fixed Fee 1
 Timing of Payment
    B. Annual Stipend  Non-Executive Chairman of the Board.
  C. Equity Grants.
 
 1
    
    For the purposes of this Policy, the date of the next
annual meeting of stockholders means, in cases where such date has not yet been
set, the anticipated date of the next annual meeting of stockholders. -1-




---



##### 



D. Meeting Fees and Expenses.
    E. Committee Chair Fees.
 Chair Fee
#### MOORE v. STATE.

No. 25478.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 30, 1952.

Fred C. Chandler, Colorado City, E. G. Pharr, Lubbock, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Appellant, for the first time, by his motion for rehearing, insists that no final judgment 'has been entered in this case and that, for this reason, the appeal should be dismissed.

The transcript contains what, upon its face, purports to be a judgment of the court showing that appellant was duly tried and convicted by a jury, upon which verdict the trial court entered the judgment. As it appears in the transcript, the judgment does not show to have been entered in the minutes of the court.

Accompanying the motion for rehearing is the certificate of the county clerk certifying that the judgment had not been entered in the minutes of the court but, by inadvertence, had been omitted from such record.

It is apparent, therefore, that a judgment has not been entered of record in the minutes of the court in this case. “Entered of record,” as applied to a judgment in a criminal case, means “entered in the minutes of the court.” The case of Ellis v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 339, 145 S.W.2d 176, appears to be here controlling; it was there held that a docket entry in a misdemeanor case did not constitute a judgment entered of record.

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is granted; the opinion heretofore rendered in this case is withdrawn; and the appeal is now dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                          18,819
<SECURITIES>                                     3,574
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,894
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,043)
<INVENTORY>                                      7,367<F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,621
<PP&E>                                          42,924
<DEPRECIATION>                                (31,575)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  84,147
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           27,360
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        56,632
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,531)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    84,147
<SALES>                                         83,516
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                95,922
<CGS>                                           49,813
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   57,974
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                43,969
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   167
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  42
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 20,354
<INCOME-TAX>                                     8,805
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,549
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,549
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.26
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.25
<FN>
<F1>Finished goods 2,453, work in process 255, raw materials 4,659.
</FN>


</TABLE>