alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 08-4927

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee, 

 v. 

CLEVELAND D. DRUMWRIGHT, 

 Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., 

Chief District Judge. (1:07-cr-00429-JAB-2) 

Submitted: July 15, 2009 Decided: July 27, 2009 

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

J. Darren Byers, LAW OFFICES OF J. DARREN BYERS, P.A., WinstonSalem, North Carolina, for Appellant. David Paul Folmar, Jr., 

Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorneys, 

Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

 Cleveland Drumwright pled guilty to conspiracy to 

distribute 50 grams or more of a substance containing a 

detectable amount of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 846 (2006), and was sentenced to 196 months’ imprisonment. On 

appeal, counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), noting no meritorious issues for appeal, 

but questioning whether the sentence imposed was reasonable. 

Finding no error, we affirm. 

 We have reviewed the record and conclude that the 

district court complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. 

P. 11. We further find that the district court did not abuse 

its discretion in sentencing Drumwright as a career offender, 

and imposed a sentence that is procedurally and substantively 

reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 128 S. Ct. 

586, 597 (2007) (review of sentence is for abuse of discretion). 

 In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire 

record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for 

appeal. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment. 

This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, 

of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States 

for further review. If the client requests that a petition be 

filed, but counsel believes that such filing would be frivolous, 

then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from 

2 
3 

representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof 

was served on the client. 

 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
#### Ex parte ALVEY.

No. 23788.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 15, *1947.*

No appearance for appellant.

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

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

The Hon. Winter King, Judge of the Criminal District Court of Dallas County, issued a writ of habeas corpus upon the application of relator, and upon a hearing remanded him to the custody of an agent of the State of Wisconsin to be returned to that state for trial upon a charge of armed robbery, from which order this appeal is prosecuted.

The record contains one bill of exception, wherein relator objected to numerous exhibits introduced by the State, approximately nineteen in number, all of which appear to be purported photostatic copies of certain instruments, with the exception of the warrant from the Governor of the State of Texas, the complaint against relator in Madison, Wisconsin, and the appointment of Harry Milstead as transfer agent to the State of Wisconsin were originals. There was no evidence or any kind of certificate from anyone to the effect that the purported photostatic copies introduced by the State were true and correct copies of original instruments. We believe the court erred in admitting such instruments in evidence; but such error would not operate to discharge the relator, since the warrant of the Governor of the State of Texas recites that it has been made known to him by the Governor of the State of Wisconsin that relator stands charged by complaint and warrant before the proper authorities with the crime of assault and theft, being armed, committed in the State, and that the said defendant had taken refuge in the State of Texas, and it was further ordered *839in the Governor’s warrant that said relator be arrested and delivered to Harry L. Milstead, who is satisfactorily shown and duly authorized to receive relator in custody and convey him back to the State of Wisconsin. The statement of facts shows that the photostatic copies objected to were not before the Governor of Texas, showing that he acted upon the requisition demand independent of them.

The warrant of the Governor of Texas being regular on its face, the same was valid and made a prima facie case; therefore, in the absence of a showing to the contrary, the issuance of a warrant which is sufficient on its fact is authority to hold the accused and return him to the demanding state. See 19 Tex.Jur., 506; Ex parte Gordon, 118 Tex.Cr.R. 150, 37 S.W.2d 1023; Ex parte Wright, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 312, 174 S.W.2d 601; Ex parte Blackwood, 143 Tex.Cr.R. 169, 157 S.W.2d 908.

The judgment remanding relator is affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 208 (Thursday, October 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 64263]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-27543]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Civil and Mechanical Systems; Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meetings of the Special Emphasis Panel in Civil and 
Mechanical Systems:

    Date and Time: November 15, 2000, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 
530, Arlington, VA.
    Contact Person: Dr. Jorn Larsen-Basse, Program Director Surface 
Engineering and Material Design, Division of Civil and Mechanical 
Systems, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 545, Arlington, VA 22230. 
Telephone: (703) 292-8360.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate nominations for the FY'00 
Mechanics and Structures of Materials and Surface Engineering and 
Material Design Review Panel as part of the selection process for 
awards.

    Date and Time: December 4, 2000, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 
630, Arlington, VA.
    Contact Person: Dr. Ken Chong, Program Director Mechanics and 
Structures of Materials, Division of Civil and Mechanical Systems, 
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 545, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: 
(703) 292-8360.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate nominations for the FY'00 
Mechanics and Structures of Materials and Surface Engineering and 
Material Design Review Panel as part of the selection process for 
awards.

    Purpose of Meetings: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: October 23, 2000.
Karen J. York,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-27543 Filed 10-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
EXHIBIT 99



                           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 Bombay Company, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly  period ended August 2, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission  on the date hereof (the "Report"),
each  of  the undersigned, 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 their 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/ JAMES  D.  CARREKER                      /S/ ELAINE D. CROWLEY
-----------------------------                 ------------------------------
James D. Carreker                             Elaine D. Crowley
Chairman of the Board and                     Senior Vice President,
Chief Executive Officer                       Chief Financial Officer
                                              and Treasurer


Dated:  September 11, 2003                    Dated:  September 11, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from The
Bombay Company, Inc. quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the nine months
ended November 2, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000096287
<NAME> THE BOMBAY COMPANY, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-04-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-02-1996
<CASH>                                            2018
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     102645
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                122745
<PP&E>                                           89899
<DEPRECIATION>                                   47037
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  175978
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            24013
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         37908
<OTHER-SE>                                      106829
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    175978
<SALES>                                         212101
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                212101
<CGS>                                           153671
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   230218
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (152)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (17965)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (7071)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (10894)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (10894)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.29)
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-7869

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus MELVIN G. STEWART, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District Judge. (CA-98-168-1; CA-05-581-1) Submitted: June 28, 2006 Decided: July 18, 2006 Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Melvin G. Stewart, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Joseph McNulty, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Melvin G. Stewart seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because a notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). A prisoner’s notice of appeal is deemed filed when submitted to prison officials for mailing in accordance with Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988). However, the prisoner must comply with Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1746 (2000) to benefit from this mailbox rule. The district court’s judgment was entered on the docket on July 7, 2005. Stewart filed a letter with the district court on November 21, 2005, inquiring about a notice of appeal filed in his case on July 26, 2005. Stewart informed that the notice of appeal was submitted by someone assisting him with his case. The district court, having received nothing prior to this date in Stewart’s case- 3 - since entry of judgment, filed the letter as a notice of appeal. To the extent the November letter is construed as a notice of appeal, it is clearly untimely. With respect to Stewart’s assertion that a timely notice of appeal was filed in July 2005, we find that remand for further factual findings under Houston v. Lack is not warranted. Stewart failed to comply with Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1) and 28 U.S.C. § 1746 and does not allege that he delivered the notice of appeal to prison officials for mailing, but rather states that it was submitted by someone assisting him with his case. Accordingly, we find he is not entitled to the benefit of the mailbox rule under Houston v. Lack
. Because Stewart has failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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. DISMISSED
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

      Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                                  to
                         Certificate Holders

                                                                                                            Ending
Class           Interest                                Principal               Losses              Balance
<S>             <C>                                     <C>                             <C>                 <C>
A               1,711,526.15   5,090,152.67   0.00   116,674,847.32
OC                      0.00           0.00   0.00     2,911,680.78
R                       0.00           0.00   0.00             0.00





</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 4.1.4
  AMENDED AND RESTATED
WARRANT
to purchase
4,282,020
Shares of Common Stock
 of Midwest Banc Holdings, Inc.
  Definitions Affiliate
 Appraisal Procedure
 Board of Directors
 1




---



##### 



Business Combination
 business day
 Capital Stock
 Certificate of Designations
 Charter
 Common Stock
 Common Stock Issuance
 Company Schedule A
 convertible securities
 Exchange Act
 Exchange Agreement
 Exercise Price Schedule A
 Expiration Time
 Fair Market Value th
 2




---



##### 



Initial Conversion Price
 Initial Number
 Issue Date Schedule A
 Market Price
 Ordinary Cash Dividends provided Schedule A
 Original Warrant
 Original Warrantholder
 Permitted Transactions
 Person
 Per Share Fair Market Value
 3




---



##### 



Preferred Stock
 Preferred Stock Conversion Price
 Pro Rata Repurchases Effective Date
 Regulatory Approvals
 SEC
 Securities Act
 Shares
 trading day
 U.S. GAAP
 4




---



##### 



VWAP
 Warrantholder
 Warrant
 Number of Shares; Exercise Price Warrantholder Shares
 Exercise of Warrant; Term Expiration Time
    5




---



##### 



Issuance of Shares; Authorization; Listing
 No Fractional Shares or Scrip
 No Rights as Stockholders; Transfer Books
 Charges, Taxes and Expenses
 Transfer/Assignment
 6




---



##### 



Exchange and Registry of Warrant
 Loss, Theft, Destruction or Mutilation of Warrant
 Saturdays, Sundays, Holidays, Etc
 Rule 144 Information
 7




---



##### 



Adjustments and Other Rights provided
 Stock Splits, Subdivisions, Reclassifications or Combinations
 Certain Issuances of Common Shares or Convertible Securities convertible securities Common Stock
Issuance
  Initial Number
 8




---



##### 



Permitted Transactions
 Other Distributions Per Share Fair Market Value
 Certain Repurchases of Common Stock
 9




---



##### 



Business Combinations
 Rounding of Calculations; Minimum Adjustments
 10




---



##### 



Timing of Issuance of Additional Common Stock Upon Certain Adjustments provided however
 Other Events
 Statement Regarding Adjustments
 Notice of Adjustment Event
 11




---



##### 



Proceedings Prior to Any Action Requiring Adjustment
 Adjustment Rules
 Exchange
 Effect of Execution Original Warrant
 No Impairment
 Governing Law, Etc
 12




---



##### 



Binding Effect
 Amendments
 Prohibited Actions
 Notices Schedule
A
 Entire Agreement
 [Remainder of page intentionally left blank]
 13




---



##### 



COMPANY:Midwest Banc Holdings, Inc.By:
    /s/  Roberto R. HerenciaName:
    Roberto R. HerenciaTitle:
    Chief Executive OfficerAttest:By:
    /s/ JoAnn Sannasardo LilekName:
    JoAnn Sannasardo LilekTitle:
    Secretary [Signature Page to Warrant]
 14




---



##### 



ANNEX A
  
 TO:
    
    Midwest Banc Holdings, Inc.RE:
    
    Election to Purchase Common Stock
  
 
 
 Holder:By:Name:Title:




---



##### 



SCHEDULE A
 Item 1
 
 Item 2
  Item 3
  Item 4
  Item 5
  Item 6
  Item 7
 Notice information:
    
    Midwest Banc Holdings, Inc.
Attn: Roberto R. Herencia
President and Chief Executive Officer
501 West North Avenue, Suite 301
Melrose Park, Illinois 60160
exv10w5



 






EXHIBIT 10.5




RENEWAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT




     THIS AGREEMENT is made this 11th day of July, 2000, between Metro Bank, hereinafter called
“Lessee”, and WAL-MART STORES, INC., a Delaware corporation, with offices at 702 S.W. Eighth
Street, Bentonville, Arkansas 72716 and a mailing address of 2001 S.E. Tenth Street, Bentonville,
Arkansas 72712, hereinafter called “Lessor”.



WITNESSETH:




     WHEREAS, the Lessor and Lessee have entered into a Lease agreement dated January 16, 1996,
(the “Lease”), affecting certain premises in the City of Moline, Illinois, Store # 2231;



     WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee desire to renew the terms of the Lease; and




     WHEREAS, the parties are now desirous of exercising certain rights under Lease to reflect
accurately their intents and wishes.



     NOW, THEREFORE, that for One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the
receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Lessor and Lessee hereby agree as follows:




	 	1.	 	Lessee hereby exercises the option to extend the Lease as set forth in Section
1.1(j) of the Lease for a period of five (5) years as allowed in the Lease.
	 
	 	2.	 	TERM. The option period will begin on May 1, 2001 and will expire on April 30,
2006
	 
	 	3.	 	RENTAL. The Rent for the option period will be $2,265.00 per month.





     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year first
hereinabove written.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	WITNESS OR ATTEST:

	 	 	 	LESSEE:	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Metro Bank	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Carolyn Lamb

	 	 	 	/s/ Gary D. Anderson	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Its President	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	ATTEST:

	 	 	 	LESSOR:	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Wal-mart Stores, Inc.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	/s/ John Y. Thomas, Assistant Secretary

	 	 	 	/s/ Kimberly K. Saylors, Director	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Wal-Mart Realty Company
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

      Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
            pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to
                 Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Multi-Media Tutorial Services, Inc.,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended May
31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), the undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350 as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge and upon a review
of the Report that:

(1) the Report of the Company filed today pursuant to Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; 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 based upon, among other things, my responsibilities as
Chief Executive Officer, my own due diligence and representations made by
certain members of the Company's senior management.



Dated: 7/20/05                                  /s/ Barry Reichman
                                                -------------------
                                                    Barry Reichman
                                                    Chief Executive Officer and
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit
32.2
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 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/A for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert C. Spindler,
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/
      Robert C. SpindlerRobert
      C. SpindlerChief
      Financial OfficerDecember
      7, 2009