alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6949

RAYMOND CALVIN VAN FIELD , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. STATE OF MARYLAND , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Paul W. Grimm , District Judge. ( 8:17

- cv - 01048

- PWG )

Submitted : February 27, 2018 Decided: April 4, 2018

Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Raymond Calvin Van F ield , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Raymond Calvin Van Field seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his filing as a 28 U.S.C. § 22 54 (2012) petition and denying relief . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (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
dis positive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition 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 Van Field has not made the requisite showing. To the extent Van Field intended his filing to be an appeal of the state courts’ dismissal of his motion to reopen proceedings , t he district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to entertain such an appeal, as “a United States District Court has no authority to review final judgments of a state court in judicial proceedings.” D

. C

. Court of Appeals v. Feldman , 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983). In any event, V an Field has failed to demonstrate a debatable claim of the denial of a federal constitutional right. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument bec ause the facts and3 legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 A2 08 6 . GREEN v . THE STATE.

Wi l l i am Green fi l ed a m o t i on t o rem an d

, req u es t in g t h at h i s ap p e a l b e

rem an ded t o t h e t ri al co urt i n o rd er t o co n d u ct a heari n g o n hi s m o t i on co m p l et e t h e

reco rd

. D u ri n g t h e ju ry t ri al

, Green s o u g h t t o i n tro d u ce a l et t er i n t o ev i d en ce, t h e

St at e o b ject ed an d a b en ch co n feren ce o ccu rred reg ard i n g t he ad m i s s io n o f a l et t er.

Th e co nferen ce w as no t t ran s cri b ed

. Fo l l owi n g t h e h eari ng

, th e t ri al co u rt s u s t ai n ed

t h e o b ject i o n s tat i n g t h at t h e l et t er wo u l d no t b e ad m i t ted at th at t im e. Th e l et t er was

n ev er ad m it t ed i n to ev id en ce.

“ Th i s i s a fel o n y cas e, an d i n fel o ny cas es th e St at e i s res p on s i b l e fo r en s u ri n g

t h at a co rrect an d co m

p l et e t ran s cri p t i s creat ed

, p res erv ed

, an d pro v i ded t o t h e

d efen d an t u p o n h is req u es t

. ” Jo h n s o n v. S t a t e

, 3 0 2 Ga. 1 88

, 19 2 (3 ) ( a ) (8 0 5 SE2 d

8 9 0 ) (2 0 1 7 ). Th e t ri al t ran s cri p t d o es n o t co n t ai n t h e b en ch co n feren ce reg ard i n g t h e

ad m i s s i b i l i t y o f t he let t er. W h en a m at t er i s n ot t ran s cri b ed “ t h e S t a t e can t ry to

recreat e t h e t ran scri p t u n d er OCGA § 5 -6 -4 1 (f) an d (g ).” Id

. at 1 9 3 (3 ) (a) (fo o t n o t e

o m i t t e d )

. G reen fi l ed a m o t i o n t o co m p l et e t h e reco rd i n o rd er t o h av e a tran s cri pt

p ro d uced b y reco l l ect i o n

, p urs u an t t o OCGA § 5 -6 -4 1 (f). Ho wev er, t he t ri al co u rt d id

n o t ru l e o n Green ’ s m o t i o n t o co m p let e t h e reco rd

, o r co nd u ct a h eari ng p u rs u an t to

OCGA § 5 -6 -4 1 (f), p ri o r t o ru l i n g o n Green ’ s m o t i o n fo r n ew t ri al

.

As t h e t ran s cri pt o f Green ’s f e l o n y c as e i s n o t co m

pl et e, an d Green h as

req u es t ed t h at t h e t ran s cri p t be co m p l et ed t h ro u g h OCGA § 5 -6

- 4 1 ( f ), we h ereb y

GRANT h i s m o ti o n an d rem an d t h i s m at t er t o t h e t ri al co u rt t o co n d uct a h eari n g o n July 10, 2019Green ’ s m o t i o n t o co m p let e t h e reco rd

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 07/10/2019
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       2,574,862
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       2,856,013
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 33,542,763
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         456,754
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                    201,462,650
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,561,176
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             245,160,702
<DEPOSITS>                                 120,313,791
<SHORT-TERM>                                54,288,933
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            858,134
<LONG-TERM>                                 44,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        26,405
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,673,438
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             245,160,702
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             11,630,809
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,141,354
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               129,810
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            12,901,973
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           3,977,206
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           7,052,100
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        5,849,873
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  181,500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              3,127,392
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,152,041
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,943,259
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,943,259
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                  1,277,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                12,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,454,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  106,000
<RECOVERIES>                                    31,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,561,176
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           108,250
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      1,452,926


</TABLE>
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
Case No. 6D 20 2 3

- 2611 Lower Tribunal No. CF19

- 182

_____________________________

D ERREK R ILEY , Appellant
,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee

.

_____________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands County

.

Angela J. Cowden , Judge.

August 20, 2024

PER CURIAM

.
AFFIRMED

.
NARDELLA and MIZE, JJ., and LAMBERT, B.D., Associate Judge
, c oncur.

Anthony W. Surber
, Mulberry , for Appellant

. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sonia C. Lawson, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa , for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

JANE DOES 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 §

and PARENT DOES 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 §

§

v § NO. 3:22-CV-01782-M

§

KAPPA ALPHA THETA §

FRATERNITY, INC. and BETA SIGMA §

CHAPTER of KAPPA ALPHA THETA §

FRATERNITY, INC., and BETA §

SIGMA FACILITY CORPORATION §

OF KAPPA ALPHA THETA §

FRATERNITY, INC. §

FACILITY CORP.’S SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE

IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISSOLVE TEMPORARY

RESTRAINING ORDER AND MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING

Defendant Beta Sigma Facility Corporation of Kappa Alpha Theta Fraternity (“Facility 

Corp.”) submits the Declaration of Kenechukwu “K.C.” Mmeje attached hereto as Exhibit A as

Supplemental Evidence in Support of its Motion to Dissolve Temporary Restraining Order which 

was filed on August 17, 2022 at ECF Doc. No. 14.

Case 3:22-cv-01782-M Document 18 Filed 08/18/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 607
2

Respectfully submitted,

John M. Lynch

Texas Bar No. 24063968

John.Lynch@lewisbrisbois.com

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 2000

Dallas, TX 75201

(214) 722-7124 - Telephone

(214) 722-7111 - Fax

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

BETA SIGMA FACILITY CORPORATION

OF KAPPA ALPHA THETA

Certificate of Service

I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served in accordance 

with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on August 18, 2022, via CM/ECF, on the following:

Rogge Dunn

dunn@trialtested.com

Greg McAllister

mcallister@roggedunngroup.com

ROGGE DUNN GROUP, PC

500 N. Akard Street, Suite 1900

Dallas, TX 75201

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Robert A. Bragalone

bbragalone@grsm.com

Jason E. Winford

jwinford@grsm.com

GORDON & REES

2200 Ross Ave, Suite 3700

Dallas, TX 75201

Attorneys for Defendant

Kappa Alpha Theta Fraternity, Inc. 

John M. Lynch

Case 3:22-cv-01782-M Document 18 Filed 08/18/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 608
Order filed, March 31, 2015.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00176-CV

____________

JOSLYN M. JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX FOR 

THE ESTATE OF RODNEY JOHNSON, DECEASED, Appellant

V.

CITY OF HOUSTON, Appellee

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2008-53919

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case was due March 17, 2015. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 35.1. The court has not received a request to extend time for filing the 

record. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record 

has not been filed timely, we issue the following order.

We order Kendra Garcia, the official court reporter, to file the record in 

this appeal within 30 days of the date of this order. 

PER CURIAM
#### FOWLER v. STATE.

No. 21841.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 14, 1942.

Alvin F. Nemir, of Dallas, for appellant.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

The appellant was convicted of the offense of murder. Upon conviction, his. punishment was fixed at ten years in the state penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. No-error appears on the face of the record.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the-Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals, and approved by the Court.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

LUBBOCKDIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF TIIE L]NTTED STATES MAGISTRATE JIJDGE

CONCERNING PLEA OF GI,JILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry

of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent of the Defendant, and the Report and Recommendation

Conceming Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto

having been filed within fourreen (14) days of service in accordance with 28 U'S.C.

$ 636OXl), the undersigrred District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistlate Judge conceming 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.

Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court's scheduling order'

SO ORDERED

Dated Decembe , 

11 

, rorr.

JAMES SLEY HENDRIX

UNI STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

NO. 5:22-CR-095-01-H

EMMANUEL NICHOLAS ROSA (1),

Defendant.

Case 5:22-cr-00095-H-BQ Document 27 Filed 12/19/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 59
1 of 3 September 19 , 201 6

Docket FAA

- 2000

- 8180

Docket Management Facility

US Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

West Building Ground Floor

Room W12

- 140

Washington, DC 20590

RE: Extension of Exemption 5560

Dear Sir or Madam:

The Regional Airline Association (“RAA”), on behalf of its Part 135 member airlines

, 1 petitions

pursuant to Sections 11.6 3 and 11. 81 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (“FARs”) for an extension of

Exemption 5560J

, which is scheduled to expire on November 30, 201 6

.

Exemption 5560 J provides relief from 14 CFR §§ 61.3(a) and (c), 63.3(a), and 135.95(a). It

permits the establishment of special procedures that enable an operator to i ssue to its flight

crewmembers, on a temporary basis, confirmation of any required crewmember certificates based upon

information contained in the operator's approved record system subject to certain conditions and

limitations. Exemption 5560 has proved to be a useful device that benefits the commercial aviation

industry and the flying public

Extending this exemption will not compromise or adversely affect safety, as the conditions and

circumstances pertaining to safety and public interest, which warranted the grant of the original request

and subsequent extensions, continue to exist. The approved procedures, encompassing the conditions

and limitations established by previous grants, have been in use for over a decade with no known

compromise of safety. It is also in the public interest as the exemption can prevent possible and

unnecessary delays or cancellations of scheduled air service. For these reasons, Exemption 5560 J

should be extended.

1 Cape Air, Empire Airlines Inc., Grand Canyon Airlines, Inc. d/b/a Grand Canyon Airlines d/b/a Scenic Airlines, Great Lakes

Airlines, New England Airlines Inc., and RAVN Alaska

.2 of 3 In accordance with FAR 11.87, RAA requests that the r equirement for publication and comment

be waived. The renewal of this exemption is not a controversial issue and this petition does not seek to

establish a precedent, rather would merely continue an accepted and established practice. Although

RAA requests waiver of publication, a summary of this petition is attached as required by FAR 11.81.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or require additional

information.

Respectfully submitted,

Stacey Bechdolt

VP, Safety & Operations/ Regulatory Counsel

Regional Airline Association

2025 M Street, NW, Suite 800

Washington, DC 20036

202

- 367

- 1252

Bechdolt@raa.org3 of 3 SUMMARY

Petitioner: Regional Airline Association.

Sections of 14 CFR Affected:

14 CFR 61.3(a)

14 CFR 61.3(c)

14 CFR 135.95(a)

Description of Relief Sought:

The Regional Airline Association petitions on behalf of its member airlines for an extension of

Exemption 5560 J

. This exemption permits RAA Part 135 member airlines to establish special

procedures that enable an air carrier to issue to its flight crewmembers, on a temporary basis,

confirmation of any required crewmember certificate based on information contained in the c arrier’s

approved record system.
H. J. Res. 80

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

Joint Resolution

Designating May 30, 1993, through June 7, 1993, as a ‘‘Time for the National

Observance of the Fiftieth Anniversary of World War II’’.

Whereas the brave men and women of the United States of America

made tremendous sacrifices during World War II to save the

world from tyranny and aggression;

Whereas the winds of freedom and democracy sweeping the globe

today spring from the principles for which over four hundred

thousand Americans gave their lives in World War II;

Whereas World War II and the events that led up to that war

must be understood in order that we may better understand

our own times, and more fully appreciate the reasons why eternal

vigilance against any form of tyranny is so important;

Whereas the World War II era, as reflected in its family life,

industry, and entertainment, was a unique period in American

history, and epitomized our Nation’s philosophy of hard work,

courage, and tenacity in the face of adversity;

Whereas, between 1991 and 1995, over nine million American veterans of World War II will be holding reunions and conferences

and otherwise commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of various

events relating to World War II; and

Whereas June 4, 1993, marks the Battle of Midway, and June

6, 1993, marks the anniversary of D-Day: Now, therefore, be

it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That May 30,
H. J. Res. 80—2

1993, through June 7, 1993, is designated as a ‘‘Time for the

National Observance of the Fiftieth Anniversary of World War

II’’, and the President is authorized and requested to issue a

proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe

that period with appropriate ceremonies and activities.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 21, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-50598

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

BARRY YETT,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:95-CR-33-2-JRN

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

Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Barry Yett, federal prisoner # 61167-080, appeals the

district court's denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to

reduce his sentence based on Amendment 599 to the United States

Sentencing Guidelines. Yett pleaded guilty to possession with

intent to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 841(a)(1), and possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation

of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
No. 04-50598

-2-

Yett argues that a sentence enhancement for possession of a

weapon constituted impermissible double counting in violation of

Amendment 599. He asserts that Amendment 599 must be applied to

U.S.S.G. §§ 2K2.1, 2K2.4, and 2K2.5. Amendment 599, which

amended the commentary to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.4, applies to

convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 844(h) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c) and

929(a). Yett pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1),

and his guideline sentencing range was computed under U.S.S.G. 

§ 2D1.1, based upon his drug conviction. Amendment 599 is

irrelevant to his sentence, and his claims are without merit.

Yett also raises the Supreme Court's recent decision in

Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), in support of his

appeal. Yett's argument is not cognizable in the context of a

motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). See United States v. Shaw,

30 F.3d 26, 29 (5th Cir. 1994). Yett's motion to file a

supplemental brief is DENIED.

AFFIRMED; MOTION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>0000943097                         
<NAME>IDEON GROUP, INC.                        
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
<CURRENCY>                                     Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         16,110
<SECURITIES>                                   61,133
<RECEIVABLES>                                  70,353
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,913
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               271,338
<PP&E>                                         49,143
<DEPRECIATION>                                 13,471
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 389,290
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          236,788
<BONDS>                                        0
<COMMON>                                       349
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                     99,290
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   389,290
<SALES>                                        56,362
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               57,543
<CGS>                                          34,647
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  69,695
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                12,152
<INCOME-TAX>                                   4,374
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            7,778
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   7,778
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .28
              

</TABLE>