alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 31.1

    Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Mark T. Walton certify that:

1. I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form  10-Q/A  of Travis  Boats &
Motors, Inc.;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  report  does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made, not  misleading  with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information  included in this quarterly  report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition,  results of operations,  and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the  registrant  and have: a) Designed
such  disclosure  controls and  procedures to ensure that  material  information
relating to the registrant,  including its  consolidated  subsidiaries,  is made
known to us by others within those entities,  particularly  during the period in
which this quarterly report is being prepared; b) Evaluated the effectiveness of
the registrant's  disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days
prior to the filing date of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation  Date");  and
c) Presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based  on our  evaluation  as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation,  to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
the  registrant's  board of  directors  (or persons  performing  the  equivalent
functions):  a) All  significant  deficiencies  in the  design or  operation  of
internal  controls  which could  adversely  affect the  registrant's  ability to
record,  process,  summarize,  and report financial data and have identified for
the registrant's  auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls;  and b)
Any fraud, whether or not material,  that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and

6. The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have  indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant  changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent  evaluation,  including any corrective  actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

                                               /s/ Mark T. Walton
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Mark T. Walton, President

Date: February 18, 2004
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determine d that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 96-30978

Summary Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES RAY BURTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

______________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Western District of Louisiana

(95-CR-60048)

______________________________________________

September 19, 1997

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Charles Ray Burton appeals from his conviction for possession

with intent to distribute cocaine, complaining of insufficiency of

the evidence, the distr ict court’s denial of his motion to

suppress, and the sufficiency of the jury instructions. Our review2

of the record and the arguments and authorities convinces us that

no reversible error was committed. The evidence was not

insufficient. S ee Uni ted States v. Ivey , 929 F.2d 759, 766 (5th

Cir. 1991). The district court did not err by denying Burton’s

motion to suppress based on Burton’s claim that the automobile stop

was improper. S ee Wren v. United States

, 116 S. Ct. 1769, 1772

(1996). Nor did the district court commit plain error in failing

to find that his consent to search was involuntary. S ee Robertson

v. Plano City of Texas

, 70 F.3d 21, 23 (5th Cir. 1995) (plain error

standard). Finally, the district court did not commit plain error

in failing to instruct the jury that it had dismissed one count of

the indictment. S ee United States v. Calverly

, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64

(5th Cir. 1994) (en banc) (citing United States v. Olano

, 507 U.S.

725, 731-37 (1993)).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT
      23.1





Consent
      of Beard Miller Company LLP


Independent
      Registered Public Accounting Firm





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
      Form
      S-3 (No. 333-145155) and Form S-8 (No. 333-80739, 333-27837 and 333-107326)
      of
      Union National Financial Corporation of our report dated March 27, 2008,
      relating to the consolidated financial statements incorporated by reference
      in
      its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.


/s/ BEARD MILLER COMPANY LLP Beard
        Miller Company LLP
 Lancaster,
        Pennsylvania
 March
        27,
        2008
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. AP-76,363

Ex parte MICHAEL WAYNE BOHANNAN, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

TARRANT COUNTY

KELLER, P.J., filed a concurring opinion.

In Ex parte Cordova, a parolee was arrested on a parole revocation warrant, and new criminal

charges were pending at the time. There is no suggestion in our opinion in that case that the parolee

1

was being confined on the new charges. In the present case, however, appellant was being confined

2

on the new charge. Whether that difference between the two cases is legally significant is a question

to be resolved at another time because, as the Court correctly points out, this case is moot.

Filed: May 11, 2011

Publish

 Ex parte Cordova, 235 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). 1

An examination of the writ file in Cordova shows that the new charges were in a different 2

county than the county of confinement, the latter of which had issued the parole revocation warrant.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 7352

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. KENNETH RAY HUNTER , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Elkins

. John Preston Bailey , District Judge. ( 2:05

- cr
- 00049

- JPB

- JES

- 1 )

Submitted : January 30, 2018 Decided: February 2, 2018

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

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Kenneth Ray Hunter, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Donald Warner, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Elkins, West Virgini a, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Ray Hunter appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to vacate his underlying criminal judgment, which had already bec ome final, based on alleged fraud on the court . We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. S ee United States v. Breit , 754 F.2d 526, 530

- 31 (4th Cir. 1985) ( there is no rule similar to Rule 60(b) for criminal judgments and district courts therefore may not vacate a judgment in a criminal case that has already become final )

. Accordingly, we
affirm the district court’s order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials bef ore this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
#### POPE et al. v. STATE et al.

No. 2717.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.

Sept. 29, 1932.

H. S. Bonham, of Corpus Christ!, for plaintiffs in error.

A. M. Turney, County Atty., of Alpine, for defendants in error.

PELPHREY, O. J.

This appeal has been perfected from a judgment against W. E. Pope and G. S. Combs, independent executor of the D. S. Combs’ Estate, for $1,725.91, taxes, penalties, and interest due the state of Texas on certain lands in Brewster county, Tex., for the years of 1921, 1923, and 1925.

The judgment further decrees a foreclosure of the tax lien on the property. Plaintiffs in error have filed no briefs in this court, *333and, therefore, the judgment should he affirmed unless there is error apparent on the face of the record.

An examination of defendants in error’s petition discloses that the suit was filed against W. E. Pope and G. S. Combs (lien holder), while the judgment .is against Pope and G. S. Combs, independent executor of the D. S. Combs’ Estate.

Article 7328, Revised Statutes, provides: “The proper persons, including all record lien holders, shall be made parties defendant in such suit, and shall be served with process and other proceedings had therein as provided by law in ordinary foreclosure suits in the district courts of this State;” and therefore lienholders of record are necessary parties in a suit to foreclose a tax lien. State Mortgage Corporation v. Magee (Tex. Civ. App.) 27 S.W.(2d) 864.

It is true that here judgment is rendered against G. S. Combs as independent executor of the estate of D. S. Combs, but there is no pleading to support such judgment. G. S. Combs, as independent executor, was not made a party to the suit by the petition, and no relief was prayed for against the estate of D. S. Combs or against G. S. Combs, in his representative capacity.

We are of the opinion that these matters constitute error apparent on the face of the record and call for a reversal of the judgment.

The judgment of the trial court is therefore reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     June 30, 2000 Financial Data Schedule for Travis Boats & Motors, Inc.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0001012734
<NAME>                        Travis Boats & Motors, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                  OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                 1
<CASH>                          7,628
<SECURITIES>                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                   22,173
<ALLOWANCES>                    (241)
<INVENTORY>                     96,778
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                127,913
<PP&E>                          28,882
<DEPRECIATION>                  5,969
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  162,603
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           121,678
<BONDS>                         8,590
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                     0
<COMMON>                        44
<OTHER-SE>                      40,881
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    162,603
<SALES>                         163,884
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                163,884
<CGS>                           (122,264)
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   (122,264)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                (33,105)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>              (5,044)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 3,489
<INCOME-TAX>                    1,278
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             2,211
<DISCONTINUED>                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                 0
<CHANGES>                       0
<NET-INCOME>                    2,211
<EPS-BASIC>                     0.50
<EPS-DILUTED>                   0.50



</TABLE>
A01A0819.

#### POOLE v. THE STATE.

(549 SE2d 787)

Decided June 4, 2001.

*McGee & McGee, James B. McGee III,*for appellant.

*Richard E. Currie, District Attorney, James D. Lamb, Assistant District Attorney,*for appellee.

Johnson, Presiding Judge.

A jury found Anthony Nathaniel Poole, Jr. guilty of armed robbery.1 In his sole enumeration of error, Poole contends that the trial court erred in failing to give a charge on the alternate crime of theft by receiving stolen property as a lesser included offense of armed robbery. Theft by receiving stolen property,2 as a matter of law, is not a lesser included offense of armed robbery.3

Poole acknowledges the *Young*decision but argues that we should not apply it to the facts of this case, as that would effectively deprive him of the defense that he was not guilty of armed robbery by virtue of the fact that he admitted to actions that would constitute theft by receiving stolen property. However, Poole was certainly not precluded from making this argument to the jury, and furthermore, a defendant is not entitled to an instruction on an offense for which he has not been charged when, as a matter of law, that offense is not a lesser included offense of the one for which he has been charged.4

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Ruffin and Ellington, JJ, concur.*

1

 OCGA § 16-8-41 (a).

2

 OCGA § 16-8-7 (a).

3

 See *Young v. State,*246 Ga. App. 651, 652-653 (1) (541 SE2d 670) (2000); *Barnett v. State,*244 Ga. App. 585, 590 (6) (536 SE2d 263) (2000); *Hemphill v. State,*242 Ga. App. 751, 752-753 (2) (a) (531 SE2d 150) (2000).

4

 See *Pruitt v. State,*217 Ga. App. 681, 683 (3) (458 SE2d 696) (1995).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

,

Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 2 7 , 2017 

# Order

Clerk September 2 7 , 2017

15 6500 ( 26 ) (27)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 15 6500

v COA: 3 37966

Wayne CC: 12

- 005176

- FC

BRANDON LEWIS CAIN

,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the C hief Justice

, the motion s of defendant

- appellant to file an

application for leave to appeal in excess of the page limitation and to submit h is pro se

pleadings “as is” are DENI ED

. The defendant

- appellant shall file an application that

subs tantially conforms to the form and page limit restrictions of the court rules on or

before Octo ber 25 , 2017 , or the matter will be administratively dismissed

.
#### SELF v. STATE.

No. 16300.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 13, 1933.

*316Earl M. Greer, of Wills Point, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Judge.

■Conviction is for the possession of intoxicating liquor for the purpose of sale, punishment assessed at one year in the penitentiary.

The indictment properly charges the offense. The record is before this court without statement of facts or bills of exception. In such condition nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
EXHIBIT
23.1


Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form
S-3 (No. 333-145155 and 033-80093) and Form S-8 (No. 333-80739, 333-27837 and
333-107326) of Union National Financial Corporation of our report dated March
30, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements incorporated by
reference in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
2009.





/s/
      PARENTEBEARD LLCParenteBeard
      LLCLancaster,
      PennsylvaniaMarch
      30, 2010
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS

In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MeriStar
Hospitality Corporation (the Issuer) for the quarterly period ended June 30,
2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), we, Paul W. Whetsell, Chief Executive Officer, and Donald D.
Olinger, Chief Financial Officer, of the Issuer, hereby certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:



|1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 (15 U.S.C 78m or 78o(d)); and
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Issuer.
|-- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 12, 2003

/s/ Paul W. Whetsell

Paul W. WhetsellChief Executive OfficerMeriStar Hospitality Corporation/s/ Donald D. Olinger

Donald D. OlingerChief Financial OfficerMeriStar Hospitality Corporation
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2540 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2540

 To provide predictability and certainty in the tax law, create jobs, 
                       and encourage investment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 13, 2018

  Ms. Stabenow (for herself, Mr. Burr, Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Graham, Mr. 
   Warner, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Peters, Mr. Moran, Mr. Nelson, and Mr. 
    Heller) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide predictability and certainty in the tax law, create jobs, 
                       and encourage investment.

    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 ``Motorsports Fairness and Permanency 
Act''.

SEC. 2. 7-YEAR CLASS LIFE FOR MOTORSPORTS ENTERTAINMENT COMPLEX 
              FACILITIES MADE PERMANENT.

    (a) In General.--Section 168(i)(15) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by striking subparagraph (D).
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2017.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
Jones Apparel Group, Inc.
New York, New York
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus constituting a part of the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 filed May 15, 1996 and August 23, 1999 of our reports dated February 2,
2001 relating to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Jones Apparel Group, Inc. and subsidiaries appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2000.
We also consent to the reference to us under the caption of "Experts" in the Prospectus.
                                               /s/ BDO Seidman, LLP
                                               BDO Seidman, LLP
New York, New York
March 26, 2001
<PAGE>   1


                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.31A

                                    AGREEMENT


         On this ___ day of July, 1997, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.
(hereinafter the "Company") and Nancy M. Jakobs (hereinafter the "Executive")
enter into this Agreement effective July 1, 1997.

         WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company are parties to a letter
agreement dated March 21, 1995 and a letter agreement dated September 21, 1995
(individually and collectively the "Letter Agreement(s)"); and

         WHEREAS, paragraph "3" of the September 21, 1995 Letter Agreement was
intended to amend the Officers' Supplemental Retirement Plan of Orange and
Rockland Utilities, Inc. (the "Plan") to provide for the inclusion of incentive
compensation in the calculation of Executive's benefit under the Plan on an
accelerated incremental basis commensurate with years of service with the
Company; and

         WHEREAS, the Plan has recently been amended to reflect that the
definition of "Compensation" under the Plan shall include all incentive
compensation that an Officer was/is eligible to earn under the Company's Annual
Team Incentive Plan at target, effective January 1, 1995; and

         WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive wish to amend the Letter
Agreements so as to reflect these recent changes to the Plan.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Company and the Executive agree as follows:

         1. Effective January 1, 1995, the benefit to which Executive may be
entitled under the Plan, as determined under the terms and conditions of the
Plan, shall be calculated to include 100% of the Annual Team Incentive Plan
award that Executive is eligible to earn at target in an applicable year, in
accordance with the definition of "Compensation" under Section 2(9)(B) of the
Plan, as amended and restated on June 5, 1997 and effective July 1, 1997.
Paragraph "3" of the September 21, 1995 Letter Agreement is hereby superseded by
this paragraph.

<PAGE>   2



         2. Nothing in this Agreement is intended, nor shall this Agreement be
construed, to in any way amend or limit the accelerated vesting provisions in
the Letter Agreements.

         3. To the extent the terms of the Letter Agreements conflict with the
terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.



     ----------------------------             ----------------------------
                 Nancy M. Jakobs                   James F. O'Grady, Jr.
                                                   Chairman, Compensation
                                                           Committee