alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### LIGHTFOOT v. STATE.

No. 26361.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 15, 1953.

No attorney for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Commissioner.

Unlawfully possessing beer, gin, and whisky for the purpose of sale in a dry area is the offense; the punishment, a fine of $200 and 90 days in jail.

Twenty-three cans of beer, four half pints . of gin, and three half pints of whisky were found in appellant’s possession. Testifying in his own behalf, appellant admitted the possession of the intoxicants and claimed that he had them for his own use and not -for the purpose of sale.

Appellant admitted that he was one and the same person convicted prior thereto of an offense of like character as that here charged and alleged by the state in the information.

*846The facts abundantly establish appellant’s guilt.

The trial court submitted the rule as to the possession of more than one quart of liquor being prima facie evidence that such possession is for the purpose of sale, Sec. (2), Art. 666-23a, Vernon’s Ann.P.C., and the rule as to the possession of more than twenty-four twelve-ounce bottles of beer being prima facie evidence that the beer is possessed for the purpose of sale. Sec. (b), Art. 667-25, Vernon’s Ann.P.C.

Appellant is correct in his contention that inasmuch as there were, fewer than twenty-four bottles of beer found in his possession, the prima facie evidence rule mentioned, had no application. Crecelius v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 230 S.W.2d 826. But such fact by no means prevents this conviction from being sustained upon the proof showing the possession of more than a quart-of liquor, which term includes gin and whisky. Sec. (5), Art. 666-3a, Vernon’s Ann.P.C.

No reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.
Case 4:22-cr-00171-P Document 30 Filed 08/03/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 43
Case 4:22-cr-00171-P Document 30 Filed 08/03/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 44
Case 2:22-cr-00086-Z-BR Document 39 Filed 11/29/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 101
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 220 Committee Discharged Senate (CDS)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 220

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               August 6 (legislative day, June 30), 1993

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

           September 10 (legislative day, September 7), 1993

                          Committee discharged

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 To designate the month of August as ``National Scleroderma Awareness 
                    Month'', and for other purposes.

Whereas scleroderma is a disease caused by the excess production of collagen, 
        the main fibrous component of connective tissue, causing hardening of 
        the skin or internal organs, or both, such as the esophagus, lungs, 
        kidney, and heart;
Whereas approximately 300,000 people in the United States suffer from 
        scleroderma, with women of childbearing age outnumbering men 4 to 1;
Whereas scleroderma, a painful, crippling, and disfiguring disease, is most 
        often progressive and can result in premature death;
Whereas the symptoms of scleroderma are variable which can complicate and 
        confuse diagnosis;
Whereas the cause and cure of scleroderma are unknown; and
Whereas scleroderma is an orphan disease that requires intensive research to 
        improve treatment as well as find the cause and cure: Now, therefore, be 
        it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the months of August 1993 
and August 1994 are designated as ``National Scleroderma Awareness 
Month''. The President is authorized and requested to issue a 
proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe each 
such month with appropriate activities that will enhance awareness of 
the disease and the need for a cure.

            Passed the House of Representatives August 5, 1993.

            Attest:

                                           DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<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 Quarterly Report of Smithway Motor Xpress Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, G.
Larry Owens, 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; 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/ G. Larry Owens
                                               --------------------------------
                                               G. Larry Owens
                                               Chief Executive Officer
                                               May 13, 2004
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 88 Engrossed in House (EH)]

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                            H. CON. RES. 88

_______________________________________________________________________

Recognizing and commending American airmen held as prisoners of war at 
    the Buchenwald concentration camp during World War II for their 
                    service, bravery, and fortitude.






103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 88

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas, during World War II, 173 Allied airmen were captured by the enemy and 
        held as prisoners of war at the Buchenwald concentration camp in Weimar, 
        Germany;
Whereas the captured airmen included 81 Americans, 27 Canadians, and 65 Britons, 
        Australians, and New Zealanders;
Whereas the facts and circumstances of their confinement are amply documented in 
        the official records maintained by the National Archives and Records 
        Administration;
Whereas a report from the International Red Cross concerning Stalag Luft III in 
        Sagan, Germany, mentioned 6 American airmen held at Buchenwald, 
        including 1 whose name does not appear on the lists maintained by the 
        National Archives;
Whereas, since the liberation of Buchenwald in 1945, numerous personal memoirs, 
        scholarly books, and articles have been published describing the 
        conditions at the concentration camp;
Whereas this extensive documentation records the extraordinarily inhuman 
        treatment, deprivations, and personal suffering inflicted on prisoners 
        of war and other inmates at Buchenwald; and
Whereas Allied Governments and veterans organizations outside the United States 
        have granted special recognition to their citizens and members who were 
        held as prisoners of war in World War II concentration camps: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) recognizes and commends the valiant American airmen 
        held as prisoners of war at the Buchenwald concentration camp 
        during World War II for their faithful service, personal 
        bravery, and exceptional fortitude; and
            (2) requests that the President issue a proclamation 
        recognizing and commending the service, bravery, and fortitude 
        of the American airmen.

            Passed the House of Representatives November 8, 1993.

            Attest:






                                                                 Clerk.`
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK; MICHAEL 

G. ANDREN; TACTICAL MACHINING 

LLC, a limited liability company; 

FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, 

INC., a nonprofit corporation,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MERRICK GARLAND, in his Official 

capacity as Attorney General of the 

United States; UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; STEVEN 

DETTELBACH, in his official capacity as 

Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, 

Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; 

BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, 

FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00691-O

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Clarification of the Scope of the Court’s 

Preliminary Injunction with Respect to Tactical Machining’s Pending Classification Request, filed 

September 15, 2022 (ECF No. 71). Because the parties did not confer, the Court presumes the 

Motion is opposed per Local Rule 7.1(b)(3). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to respond 

no later than September 22, 2022, at 5:00 p.m. and Defendant may reply no later than 

September 24, 2022, at 5:00 p.m.

SO ORDERED on this 19th day of September, 2022.

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 74 Filed 09/16/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 982
H. Con. Res. 81 Agreed to May 7, 1993

One Hundred Third Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,

the fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-three

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF RUNNING OF SPECIAL OLYMPICS

TORCH RELAY THROUGH CAPITOL GROUNDS.

On May 27, 1993, or on such other date as the Speaker of

the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of

the Senate may designate jointly, the 1993 Special Olympics Torch

Relay may be run through the Capitol Grounds, as part of the

journey of the Special Olympics torch to the District of Columbia

Special Olympics summer games at Gallaudet University in the

District of Columbia.

SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

The Capitol Police Board shall take such action as may be

necessary to carry out section 1.

SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARATIONS.

The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions for physical preparations for the event authorized by section 1.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.
Exhibit 32

Exhibit 32 - Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C Section 1350, and accompanies the quarterly report on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 of Taitron Components
Incorporated.

I, Stewart Wang, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
of registrant, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

      (i)   the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities
            Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

      (ii)  the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the registrant.

Date: November 14, 2007.         By: /s/ Stewart Wang
                                     ---------------------------------
                                     Stewart Wang
                                     Principal Executive Officer and
                                     Principal Financial Officer


                                    Page 14
#### GUINN v. STATE.

No. 22369.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 20, 1943.

No attorney, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is before us without bills of exception and without statement of facts.

The procedure is regular. We find nothing for our consideration.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 218 (Thursday, November 9, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 67356]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29009]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Sunshine Act Meeting

Federal Register Citation of Previous Announcement: November 6, 2000, 
65 FR 66535.

Previously Announced Time and Date of Meeting: November 8, 2000, 11:00 
a.m.

Change in the Meeting: The time for the Commission meeting scheduled 
for November 8, 2000, has been changed to 11:00 a.m.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-29009 Filed 11-7-00; 3:53 pm]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 28, 2009

1021 

# Order

October 28, 2009

139317

DARRYL SCHINDLER, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139317 COA: 279295 WCAC: 06-000084 ASPLUNDH TREE EX PERT COMPANY and LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 9, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<page> EXHIBIT 32.02




CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Morgan Stanley
Diversified Futures Fund L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I,
Christian Angstadt, Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management
Corporation, the general partner of the Partnership, 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; and
(2)	The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Partnership.









By:  /s/Christian Angstadt

Name:	   Christian Angstadt
Title	:  Chief Financial Officer of Demeter Management Corporation,
		   the general partner of the Partnership

Date:	   May 15, 2008
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

 § 

VS. § CRIMINAL NO. 4:22-CR-045-Y 

 § 

JUAN MANUEL AMAYA-CASTANEDA (1) § 

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ADJUDGING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court has reviewed all relevant matters of record in this case, 

including especially (1) the Consent to Administration of Guilty Plea 

and Allocution by United States Magistrate Judge and (2) the Report of 

Action and Recommendation on Plea Before the United States Magistrate 

Judge. No objections to either have been filed within fourteen (14) 

days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, 

the Court concludes that the report and recommendation of the magistrate 

judge on the plea of guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the 

Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and defendant 

is hereby adjudged guilty. The defendant’s sentence will be imposed in 

accordance with the Court’s sentencing scheduling order. 

SIGNED March 31, 2022. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 TERRY R. MEANS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cr-00045-Y Document 22 Filed 03/31/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 46
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

MIGUEL ANGEL TRUJILLORODRIGUEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-50259

D.C. No. 3:16-cr-00564-JLS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Janis L. Sammartino, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2017** 

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Miguel Angel Trujillo-Rodriguez appeals from the district court’s judgment

and challenges the 30-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea

FILED

APR 20 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
conviction for being a removed alien found in the United States, in violation of 8

U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Trujillo-Rodriguez contends that the district court procedurally erred by

failing to explain its reasons for rejecting his argument for a below-Guidelines

sentence in light of the then-pending amendment to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2. 

We review for plain error, see United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103,

1108 (9th Cir. 2010), and conclude that there is none. Trujillo-Rodriguez argued at

length in his sentencing memorandum and during the sentencing hearing that he

should receive a lower sentence because, under the amendment that would take

effect just a few months after his sentencing, he would be subject to a lower

Guidelines range. The record reflects that the court considered these arguments,

but did not believe that they supported a downward variance. Rather, the court

explained that a mid-range sentence was warranted in light of the 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3553(a) factors and the totality of the circumstances, including the nature of

Trujillo-Rodriguez’s offense and his prior crime. While the court might have said

more, its failure to do so in this case did not affect Trujillo-Rodriguez’s substantial

rights. See United States v. Dallman, 533 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2008). 

AFFIRMED.

2 16-50259
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7757

ERIC LAMONT COLES,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

T. DARDEN, Assistant Warden; M. FOSTER, Unit Manager; LIEUTENANT A. 

BENTLEY; CAPTAIN LORD,

Defendants - Appellees.

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

Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:19-cv-00528-REP-RCY)

Submitted: July 15, 2020 Decided: August 17, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Lamont Coles, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Lamont Coles appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

(2018) action without prejudice because he failed to pay the initial partial filing fee or state 

that he is unable to pay. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the 

informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Coles’ informal brief does not challenge 

the basis for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s 

order. See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is 

an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues 

preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FILED AS PART OF THE
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                             957
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      3,361
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,760
<PP&E>                                         112,279
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,198
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  88,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,758
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            56
<OTHER-SE>                                      59,245
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    88,103
<SALES>                                         28,448
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,448
<CGS>                                            7,474
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   26,642
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    41
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 358
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,407
<INCOME-TAX>                                       566
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                841
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       841
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.14
        

</TABLE>