alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ex parte William E. ROWLAND.

No. 24875.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 21, 1950.

Bracewell & Wright, Huntsville, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Relator, by motion, seeks to withdraw his application for the writ of habeas corpus.

The motion is granted, and the writ of habeas corpus is dismissed without prejudice.

Opinion approved by the court.
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 State

          - [Public Notice 3457] 

# AGENCY:

Department of State.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. 2459), the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                         *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, I hereby                               ( print page 64737)                            determine that the objects to be included in the exhibition “Modern Art and America: Alfred Stieglitz and His New York Galleries,” imported from abroad for the temporary exhibition without profit within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign lenders. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the National Gallery of Art, in Washington, DC from on or about January 28, 2001 to on or about April 22, 2001 is in the national interest. Public Notice of these Determinations is ordered to be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information, including a list of the exhibit objects, contact Carol Epstein, Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-619-6981). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001. 

Dated: October 23, 2000.

William B. Bader,

Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 00-27803 Filed 10-27-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-08-U
H. R. 3210 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE FIRST SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen 

An Act 

Making continuing appropriations for military pay in the event of a Government 

shutdown. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pay Our Military Act’’. 

SEC. 2. CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED 

FORCES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There are hereby appropriated for fiscal year 

2014, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 

for any period during which interim or full-year appropriations 

for fiscal year 2014 are not in effect— 

(1) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to members of the Armed Forces (as defined in section 

101(a)(4) of title 10, United States Code), including reserve 

components thereof, who perform active service during such 

period; 

(2) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to the civilian personnel of the Department of Defense 

(and the Department of Homeland Security in the case of 

the Coast Guard) whom the Secretary concerned determines 

are providing support to members of the Armed Forces 

described in paragraph (1); and 

(3) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to contractors of the Department of Defense (and the 

Department of Homeland Security in the case of the Coast 

Guard) whom the Secretary concerned determines are providing 

support to members of the Armed Forces described in paragraph 

(1). 

(b) SECRETARY CONCERNED DEFINED.—In this section, the term 

‘‘Secretary concerned’’ means— 

(1) the Secretary of Defense with respect to matters concerning the Department of Defense; and 

(2) the Secretary of Homeland Security with respect to 

matters concerning the Coast Guard. 

SEC. 3. TERMINATION. 

Appropriations and funds made available and authority granted 

pursuant to this Act shall be available until whichever of the 

following first occurs: (1) the enactment into law of an appropriation 

(including a continuing appropriation) for any purpose for which 

amounts are made available in section 2; (2) the enactment into 
H. R. 3210—2 

law of the applicable regular or continuing appropriations resolution 

or other Act without any appropriation for such purpose; or (3) 

January 1, 2015. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### CLARK v. COMMONWEALTH et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 19, 1953.

Otis T. Clark, pro se., Eddyville.

J. D. Buckman, Jr., Atty. Gen., and W. Owen Keller, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

SIMS, Chief Justice.

This appeal is prosecuted by Otis Clark from a judgment of the Marshall Circuit Court which denied him a writ of coram nobis. Clark, who evidently is not a lawyer, attempted to represent himself in seeking to be released from prison on this rather technical writ, and, as may be expected, we are presented with a conglomerate and unintelligible record.

A paper which the pleader intended as his petition shows Clark was convicted in 1948 in the Marshall Circuit Court on three indictments which charged him with passing on three different occasions “cold” checks for more than $20. His punishment was fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years on each conviction but he was probated on all three convictions. Clark violated the terms of his probation and was sent to a federal prison in 1949 for two years. Upon being released therefrom, Clark’s probation was revoked and he was *447sentenced to three terms of two years each in the Eddyville penitentiary.

The petitioner seeks coram nobis on the ground that he should be permitted to serve his three terms concurrently as the judgment sentencing him did not specify that the terms were to he served consecutively. In the very recent case of Wooden v. Goheen, Ky., 255 S.W.2d 1000, we held that under § 288 of the Criminal Code of Practice separate judgments of conviction must be served consecutively.

This court has said in several cases that coram nobis would lie to obtain a new trial because of conditions for which the applicant was not responsible and which made the record in which the judgment was rendered appear regular and in conformity with law, when the real facts as presented in the application for the writ rendered the original trial tantamount to none at all, and to enforce the judgment would be an absolute denial of justice. Elliott v. Com., 292 Ky. 614, 167 S.W.2d 703, and authorities therein cited. The petition in the record before us does not aver any facts showing any irregularity in the trial, much less a hidden mistake of facts in appellant’s trial which could not have been discovered by due diligence in time to have been presented to the court which tried him. Duff v. Com., 296 Ky. 689, 178 S.W.2d 191; Spears v. Com., Ky., 253 S.W.2d 570. Therefore, the trial judge did not err in sustaining a general demurrer to the petition and in denying the writ.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                       1,210,011
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,220,245
<ALLOWANCES>                                    18,000
<INVENTORY>                                  2,443,743
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,924,732
<PP&E>                                       6,107,588
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,110,328
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,476,645
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,459,048
<BONDS>                                      1,016,621
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        69,005
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,621,508
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,476,645
<SALES>                                      7,437,578
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,437,578
<CGS>                                        4,942,775
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,874,419
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (12,591)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             107,883
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                525,092
<INCOME-TAX>                                   160,585
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            364,507
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,465)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   363,042
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .131
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .126
        

</TABLE>
#### Wawa Dairy Farms, Inc., *v.*Kline et al., Appellant.

Argued October 13, 1939.

*511November 22, 1939:

Before Keller, P. J., Cunningham, Baldrige, Stadtfeld, Parker and Rhodes, JJ.

*Raymond A. White, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Francis X. McGlanaghan,*for appellee.

Opinion by

Stadtfeld, J.,

This' appeal is governed by the opinion in Benson Gardner versus the same defendants,, which is filed herewith.

For the reasons given in said opinion, the assignments of error are overruled and judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>





                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                       TERAYON COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, INC.
              CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63
                      OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

I, Zaki Rakib, the Chief Executive Officer of Terayon Communication Systems,
Inc. (the "Company"), certify that to the best of my knowledge:

         (i)      the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K dated March 15,
                  2004 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, fully
                  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (ii)     the information contained in the said Form 10-K fairly
                  presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
                  and results of operations of the Company.




Date: March 15, 2004                             By: /s/ Zaki Rakib
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Zaki Rakib
                                                     Chief Executive Officer
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16
- 7600

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,

v. CRAIG A. MURPHY , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. ( 3:96

- cr - 00066

- REP

- 17; 3:16

- cv - 00764

- REP; 3:16

- cv - 00765

- REP )

Submitted : March 20, 2017 Decided: March 28, 2017

Before MOTZ , Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Craig A. Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Brian R. Hood, Heather Hart Mansfield, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Stephen Wiley Miller, Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virg inia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Craig A. Murphy seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his filings as successive motions under 28 U.S. C. § 2255 (2012) and dismissing them fo r lack of jurisdiction . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive proced ural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Murphy has not made the requisite showing. Accordingl y, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3353 

To amend the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 to extend 

the period during which supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits are temporarily increased. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 28, 2013 

Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Ms. LEE of California, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. CARTWRIGHT, Ms. WATERS, Ms. CLARKE, Ms. SHEA-PORTER, 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. SERRANO, Ms. PINGREE of Maine, Mr. NADLER, 

Mr. CAPUANO, Ms. BORDALLO, Ms. KUSTER, Mr. TAKANO, Mr. CONNOLLY, Mr. LANGEVIN, Mr. HOLT, Mr. POCAN, Mr. TIERNEY, Ms. 

BROWN of Florida, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. TONKO, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. GRIJALVA, Ms. DELAURO, Ms. MOORE, Mr. HONDA, Mr. 

COHEN, Mr. CARSON of Indiana, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Ms. LOFGREN, Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, Ms. FUDGE, Ms. SLAUGHTER, and Mr. MCDERMOTT) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act 

of 2009 to extend the period during which supplemental 

nutrition assistance program benefits are temporarily increased. 

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

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 3353 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Extend Not Cut SNAP 

3 Benefits Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY INCREASE IN SUPPLE5 MENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE BENEFITS. 

6 Section 101(a) of title I of division A of the American 

7 Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111– 

8 5; 123 Stat. 120) is amended— 

9 (1) in paragraph (1) by striking ‘‘section 3(o)’’ 

10 and inserting ‘‘section 3(u)’’, and 

11 (2) in paragraph (2) by striking ‘‘2013’’ and in12 serting ‘‘2014’’. 

13 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

14 This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall 

15 take effect on September 30, 2013. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 EnergySouth, Inc. (the "Company") Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John S.
Davis, President and 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, 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 presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

Date: December 5, 2003                          /s/ John S. Davis
                                                -----------------
                                                John S. Davis
                                                President and
                                                Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 296 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 296

To allow Members of Congress to decline certain retirement benefits and 
    contributions by the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 15, 2013

  Mr. Nugent introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To allow Members of Congress to decline certain retirement benefits and 
    contributions by the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Congress is Not a Career Act''.

SEC. 2. GRANTING MEMBERS OF CONGRESS THE OPTION TO DECLINE CERTAIN 
              BENEFITS.

    (a) Federal Employees Retirement System Opt Out.--Section 8401(20) 
of title 5, United States Code, is amended by striking ``, and who'' 
and all that follows through ``2004''.
    (b) Thrift Savings Plan Agency Contribution Opt Out.--Section 
8432(c) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 
        subsection, contributions under paragraphs (1) through (3) may 
        not be made in the case of any Member who makes an election 
        under subparagraph (B).
            ``(B) Any Member may, by written notice to the official by 
        whom such Member is paid, elect not to receive contributions 
        under this subsection. An election under this subparagraph--
                    ``(i) shall be effective with respect to pay 
                periods beginning on or after the date on which such 
                election is made; and
                    ``(ii) shall be irrevocable.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Maureen D. Howley, Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of the Managing Owner,
Preferred Investment Solutions Corp. (the Managing Owner), of World Monitor Trust  Series B (Series B), hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



| | (1) | Series Bs Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual
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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Series B.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                   |  |  |  | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------ |  |  |  | 
|                                                                   |  |  |  | 
|                                                                   |  | 
|/S/    MAUREEN D. HOWLEY                                           |  |  |  | 
|Maureen D. HowleyChief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President |  |  |  | 
|                                                                   |  |  |  | 
|March 31, 2006                                                     |  |  |  |
Properly· Inflated LJnderinflatecl/ 

OVerloaded 




Hennos.dio 

0 

No.HNOC-.7'-$.1l.S Gr.J~ Chihuahua 

0 C!~;ut c....1umemoc Oe11CW::i 0 CHJ~ CJmargo 

Luoboc.:.:. 

0 

Midland 

0 

Abilene 

c 

Texas 


-··········· 

........ ;.~ 75.00 70.00 65.00 -. 'innl!r 0"'."11-Tirt> Pr('"'"_.sur!' ~··· •Owts.ide AkTemp 50.00 

45.00 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"40.00 

1AM 12~S1AM 2:3<;PM 5:51PM 7:51AM 9:51AM 11:53 AM 1;55 PM 1:51 PM 4:58: PM 8:3.DAM 8:58AM :9:55AM 12:2PM 

T KERV KVHN KDMN KTUS KSDL 
• 4CCC 

"" 

3CCC 

2CCC 

i5CC iCCC 

ou .. !.Tlt,. 

'"""'r .. Pr .. 

• 
.. 

·. 

.. 

.. 

'?:SlAM 3>:51AM ll:S3AM l:SSPM 2:51PM 4:SdPM 

30.20 

30.15 

30.10 

--out::er :Ch•ai-Tire Pre:o:o .. re 

30.05 •Jnnou Du.:a!-Tire Pressure 30.00 

2:1.95 2$-.S$ 

/50R22.5 

/2013 

os,oo 

HEB PSI Test 

8/15(2014 3'38,15 PM Typical Week