alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-20426

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MELQUIADES ROCHA LEOS, also known as

Jose Leos, also known as El Pelon,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-99-CR-370-2

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

June 1, 2001

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Counsel for Melquiades Rocha Leos has moved for leave to

withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Leos has received a copy of

counsel's brief and has filed a response. 

Leos argues that the district court improperly enhanced his

sentence under United States Sentencing Guidelines §§ 2D1.1(b)(1)

and 3B1.1(b). Leos knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to

appeal his sentence or the manner in which it was determined. 
No. 00-20426

-2-

See United States v. Portillo, 18 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir. 1994). 

This argument is therefore foreclosed. 

Leos also challenges the indictment, the sentence, and

counsel’s performance on the basis of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530

U.S. 466 (2000), and Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 (1999). 

There can be no Apprendi or Jones violation because Leos’s

sentence was not increased above the statutory maximum of life

imprisonment by any of the findings made by the district court at

sentencing. United States v. Keith, 230 F.3d 784, 786-87 (5th

Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1163 (2001). 

We do not address Leos’s conclusional assertion that counsel

was ineffective because he failed to investigate the case or

prepare for trial. See United States v. Volsken, 766 F.2d 190,

193 (5th Cir. 1985).

Our independent review of the brief, the record, and Leos’s

response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. 

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED,

counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Leos’s motion for

appointment of new counsel is DENIED.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6911

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DEWAYNE RESHARD ROBINSON , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Big Stone Gap

. James P. Jones , District Judge. ( 2:14

- cr - 00006

- JPJ

- 1 ; 2:17

- cv - 81296

- JPJ )

Submitted : July 30, 2020 Decided: August 17, 2020

Before WILKINSON and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Dewayne Reshard Robinson , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Dewayne R eshard Robinson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018) motion . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2018). 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) (2018). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating t hat reasonable jurists

c ould find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrat e both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 92012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We hav e independently reviewed the record and conclude that Robinson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss th e appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adeq uately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### WYATT et al. v. HIGGENBOTHAM.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 21, 1951.

Murray L. Brown, Robert B. Bird, London, for appellants.

J. Milton Luker, Roy Tooms, Jr., London, for appellee.

WADDILL, Commissioner.

An appeal is sought from a judgment awarding appellee $260 for an injury to a finger alleged to have been caused by the negligence of appellants.

The evidence disclosed that appellant, Wyatt, operates a fleet of taxicabs. On the occasion of her injury, appellee engaged one of Wyatt’s cabs, driven by Wyatt’s agent and coappellant, Miller, to drive her to her home. Upon reaching her destination, appellee alighted by the door on the right side of the cab and Miller by the left door. While Miller was removing appellee’s parcels from the trunk in the rear of the taxi, appellee undertook to remove her packages from inside the cab and while she was thus engaged, its door swung shut mashing her finger. Appellee testified that the taxi was parked with the right rear wheel in a ditch which caused the body of the car to “tilt.” She admits that she did not ask Miller to assist her in alighting from the taxi or to help her *751remove her bundles. She further admits that she was familiar with the place where the cab had stopped and knew of the manner in which it was “tilted” before she alighted.

Appellants argue that they were entitled to a directed verdict because, (1) appellee failed to prove negligence on their part and (2) appellee was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. Appellee contends that appellants were negligent in that Miller did not choose a safe place for her to alight from the cab.

 The proven facts and circumstances are undisputed, hence, the question presented is one of law. We have no difficulty in deciding that appellants’ contentions are well taken and the court erred in failing to direct a verdict in their favor. Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. Woods, 298 Ky. 773, 184 S.W.2d 93. In the event the evidence is substantially the same on another trial the court will direct a verdict in favor of appellants.

Wherefore the motion for appeal is sustained; the appeal is granted and the judgment of the circuit court is reversed for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the form
10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US$
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         443,303
<SECURITIES>                                 1,250,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  531,754
<ALLOWANCES>                                    25,000
<INVENTORY>                                    759,664
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,094,374
<PP&E>                                         909,941
<DEPRECIATION>                                 465,841
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,555,623
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          519,795
<BONDS>                                        300,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        52,937
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,682,891
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,555,623
<SALES>                                      2,407,719
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,475,124
<CGS>                                        1,208,151
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,208,151
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,448,515
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,503
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (220,045)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (220,045)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (220,045)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.04)
        



</TABLE>
36T H DISTRIC T 71 5 FARNU M BUILDIN G P.O
. BO X 3003 6 LANSING , M l 48909-753 6 PHONE : (517 ) 373-794 6 TDLL-FREE : (866 ) 305-213 6 FAX : (517 ) 373-267 8 senj[ncx)lenaar@senate.mjchigan.go v www.SenatorJohnMoolenaar.co m 

## JOH N MOOLENAA R VICE-CHAIRMA N O F APPROPRIATION S

MICHIGA N SENAT E

Marc h 23,201 2 APPROPRIATIONS , VIC E CHAI R SUBCOMMITTEES : DEPARTMEN T O F COMMUNITY HEALTH , CHAI R AGRICULTURE , VIC E CHAI R CAPITA L OUTLA

Y STANDIN G COMMITTEES : VETERANS , MILITARY AFFAIR S AN D HOMELAN D SECURITY , CHAI R OUTDOO R RECREATIO N AN D TOURIS M REDISTRICTIN G Mr
. Denni s DeVan

y Chief , Essentia ! Air

Servic e Divisio n Offic e o f Aviatio n Analysi s Departmen

t o f Transportatio n 1200 Ne w Jersey Ave. , S E Washington , D.C
. 2059 0 REF : DOT-OST-2009-030 0 Dea r Mr
. DeVany , -X }

" n n-1-J.J,% ;

: - —= - -i- i o I joi n wit h th e resident s o f

Aipena , Michiga

n includin g th e Alpen aCit y Council , th e Alpen aCount y Boar d o f Commissioners , th e Alpen aCount y Regional Airpor

t Manager , th e Alpen aAre aChambe r o f Commerce , th e Target Alpen aEconomi c Development Director , th e Mayo

r of Alpen aand th e Northeas t

Michiga n U.S
. Congressiona

l delegatio n in supportin g thei r reques t that th e U.S
. Department

o f Transportatio n rejec t

th e current

round o f th e Essentia

l Ai r Servic e (EAS ) bi d proposa l for Alpen aan d open th e biddin g u p to afourt

h cycle
. Alpen ai s b

y fa r th e larges t

cit y i n th e Northeas t

portio n o f

Lowe r Michigan
. Wit

h severa l majo r employer s i

n th e region , i n additio n to th e Thunder

Ba y National Marin e Sanctuary , th e abilit y t o ge t in an d out

o f Alpen awit

h relativ e eas e i s essentia l t o th e continue d growt

h and economi c development o f no t only th e cit

y an d th e county , but

Northeas t Lowe r Michiga n i n it s entirety
. Althoug h i

t i s importan

t tha t th e replacemen t

o f Delt aa s a n EA S provide

r b e swift , i t

i s more important

tha t th e decisio n tha t i s made b e effectiv e an d efficient
. Originatin g an d departin g passenger s i n Alpen ahav e show n astead y increas e i

n th e las t yea r to 20,000 , therefor

e i t i s essential tha

t th e Delt aEA S replacement b e abl e t o accommodat

e suc h growin g numbers
. W

e believ e tha

t th e current

bi d proposa

l b y AirChoiceOn e i s neithe

r efficien t no r effective
. W e believ e tha

t there are othe

r option s availabl e t o u s i f

w e hav e th e opportunit

y t o ope n th e EA S biddin g u p t o afourt

h cycle
. W e urg e th e Department

o f Transportatio n t o consider al l tha t ha s been presente d t o themb y th e citizen s o f

Alpen a when makin g thei r

decisio n on th e EA S bid
. I t i s paramoun

t tha t thi s determinatio n b e thoroug h an d methodical
. Than k yo u fo r you r promp t attentio n t o thi s important matter . Pleas e don' t

hesitate t o contac t

m e i f yo u hav e any questions
. Sincerely ,
I Moolenaa

r State Senator , 36" ' Distric t

REPRESENTING : ALCONA • ALPEN A • CRAWFOR D • GLADWI N • IOSC O • MIDLAN D • MONTMORENC Y OGEMA W • OSCOD A • OTSEG O
**EXHIBIT
        32**
 
 **CAREADVANTAGE,
        INC**
 **CERTIFICATION
        PURSUANT TO**
 **18
        U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
        906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 
 Pursuant
        to, and for purposes only of, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, Dennis J. Mouras, Chief
        Executive Officer and acting principal financial officer of CareAdvantage,
        Inc.
        (the “Company”), hereby certify that (i) the Quarterly Report of the Company on
        Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 filed with the Securities
        and Exchange Commission (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
        Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii)
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  
 Dated:
                November 14, 2005
              
              /s/
                Dennis J. MourasDennis J. Mouras, Chief Executive
                Officerand acting Principal Financial
                Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 123 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 123

  Encouraging United States businesses to adopt a voluntary code for 
   applying internationally recognized human rights principles when 
        engaging in commerce in the People's Republic of China.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 15, 1993

     Mr. Neal of Massachusetts submitted the following concurrent 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Encouraging United States businesses to adopt a voluntary code for 
   applying internationally recognized human rights principles when 
        engaging in commerce in the People's Republic of China.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that the President should direct the 
Secretary of Commerce to consult with American business leaders, having 
significant trade with or investments in the People's Republic of 
China, to encourage them to adopt a voluntary code of conduct that--
            (1) follows internationally recognized human rights 
        principles;
            (2) ensures that the employment of Chinese citizens is not 
        discriminatory in terms of sex, ethnic origin, or political 
        belief;
            (3) refrains from knowingly using prison labor;
            (4) recognizes workers' right to organize and bargain 
        collectively; and
            (5) discourages mandatory political indoctrination on 
        business sites.

                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
10-QSB March 31, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                MAR-31-1996
<CASH>                                           12,677
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 12,677
<PP&E>                                            4,705
<DEPRECIATION>                                        0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   24,584
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           541,124
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (516,546)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     24,584
<SALES>                                               0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    600
<CGS>                                                 0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                309,521
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                9,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (518,421)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (308,421)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (318,421)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (4.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0
        


</TABLE>
Exhibit 21

List of Subsidiaries



1.
LaSalle Hotel Properties 2.
LaSalle Hotel Operating Partnership, L.P. 3.
LHO Hollywood Financing, Inc. (QRS) 4.
LHO New Orleans Financing, Inc. 5.
LHO Financing, Inc. 6.
LHO Hollywood LM, L.P. 7.
LHO New Orleans LM, L.P. 8.
LHO Financing Partnership I, L.P. 9.
LHO Viking Hotel, L.L.C. 10.
LHO Harborside Hotel, L.L.C. 11.
LHO Mission Bay Hotel, L.P. 12.
LHO San Diego Financing, L.L.C. 13.
LaSalle Washington One Lessee, Inc. 14.
LaSalle Washington Two Lessee, Inc. 15.
LaSalle Washington Three Lessee, Inc. 16.
LaSalle Washington Four Lessee, Inc. 17.
LHO Washington Five Lessee, L.L.C. 18.
LHO Washington Hotel One, L.L.C. 19.
LHO Washington Hotel Two, L.L.C. 20.
LHO Washington Hotel Three, L.L.C. 21.
LHO Washington Hotel Four, L.L.C. 22.
I&G Capital, L.L.C. 23.
LaSalle Hotel Lessee, Inc. 24.
LHO Dallas One Lessee L.L.C. 25.
LHO Dallas Beverages, Inc. 26.
LHO Bloomington One Lessee, L.L.C. 27.
LHO Leesburg One Lessee, Inc. 28.
LHO Washington Hotel Six, L.L.C. 29.
LHO Washington Six Lessee, Inc. 30.
LHO Indianapolis One Lessee, L.L.C. 31.
LHO Indianapolis Hotel One MM, L.L.C. 32.
LHO Indianapolis Hotel One CMM, Inc. 33.
LHO Indianapolis Hotel One, L.L.C. 34.
LHO Alexandria One, L.L.C. 35.
LHO Alexandria One Lessee, L.L.C. 36.
LHO Santa Cruz Hotel One, L.L.C. 37.
LHO San Diego Hotel One, L.L.C. 38.
LHO San Diego Hotel One, L.P. 39.
LHO Santa Cruz Hotel One, L.P. 40.
LHO San Diego One Lessee, Inc. 41.
LHO Santa Cruz One Lessee, Inc. 42.
LHO Grafton Hotel, L.P. 43.
LHO Grafton Hotel Lessee, Inc.


44.
LHO Grafton Hotel, L.L.C. 45.
LHO Onyx One Lessee, L.L.C. 46.
LHO Onyx Hotel One, L.L.C. 47.
LHO Badlands, L.L.C. 48.
LHO Badlands Lessee, L.L.C. 49.
LHO Le Parc, L.L.C. 50.
LHO Le Parc, L.P. 51.
LHO Le Parc Lessee, Inc. 52.
Westban Hotel Investors, L.L.C. 53.
LHO Backstreets, L.L.C. 54.
LHO Backstreets Lessee, L.L.C. 55.
LHO Tom Joad Circle DC Lessee, L.L.C. 56.
LHO Tom Joad Circle DC, L.L.C. 57.
LHO Mission Bay Rosie Hotel, L.L.C. 58.
LHO Mission Bay Rosie Hotel, L.P. 59.
LHO Mission Bay Rosie Lessee, Inc. 60.
LHO Alexis Hotel, L.L.C. 61.
LHO Alexis Lessee, L.L.C. 62.
LHO Chicago River, L.L.C. 63.
LHO Chicago River Lessee, L.L.C. 64.
LHO Michigan Avenue Freezeout Lessee, L.L.C. 65.
LHO Michigan Avenue Freezeout, L.L.C. 66.
Lucky Town Burbank, L.P. 67.
Lucky Town Burbank Lessee, Inc. 68.
Lucky Town Burbank, L.L.C. 69.
NYC Serenade Lessee, L.L.C. 70.
NYC Serenade, L.L.C. 71.
Souldriver Lessee, Inc. 72.
Souldriver, L.L.C. 73.
Souldriver, L.P. 74.
Modern Magic Member, L.L.C. 75.
Modern Magic Hotel, L.L.C. 76.
Magic Member Lessee, L.L.C. 77.
Modern Magic Hotel Lessee, L.L.C. 78.
Ramrod Lessee, Inc. 79.
Paradise Lessee, Inc. 80.
Glass Houses 81.
DC One Lessee, L.L.C. 82.
DC Two Lessee, L.L.C. 83.
DC Three Lessee, L.L.C. 84.
DC Four Lessee, L.L.C. 85.
DC Six Lessee, L.L.C. 86.
DC I&G Capital Lessee, L.L.C.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000939730
<NAME>                        Expert Software, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1.00
<CASH>                                         4,736
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6,643
<ALLOWANCES>                                   4,302
<INVENTORY>                                    1,201
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               13,038
<PP&E>                                         3,842
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 18,254
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,159
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       75
<OTHER-SE>                                     11,020
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   18,254
<SALES>                                        7,075
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               7,075
<CGS>                                          2,649
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  6,769
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               39
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                356
<INCOME-TAX>                                   132
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            224
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   224
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .03
        


</TABLE>