alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

JASON FRANCIS PACYNA, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 22-0166 PRPC

FILED 10-25-2022

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2018-152602-001

The Honorable Katherine Cooper, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Daniel Strange

Counsel for Respondent

Jason Francis Pacyna, Yuma

Petitioner
STATE v. PACYNA

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma, Judge Cynthia J. Bailey, and Vice 

Chief Judge David B. Gass delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Jason Francis Pacyna seeks review of the superior 

court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed pursuant 

to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is Pacyna’s first petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, this court will not 

disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. See 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577 ¶ 19 (2012). Petitioner has the burden to 

show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for postconviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the order 

denying the petition for post-conviction relief and the petition for review. 

This court finds the petitioner has not established error. 

¶4 This court grants review but denies relief.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 161 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2236]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

               CONGRATULATING PREVENT BLINDNESS WISCONSIN

                                  _____
                                 

                             HON. RON KIND

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, October 3, 2008

  Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Prevent 
Blindness Wisconsin and to celebrate its 50th anniversary of service. 
Prevent Blindness is a non-profit, volunteer organization that has 
provided free vision screenings for over five million Wisconsin 
children and adults since 1958.
  This year alone, Prevent Blindness Wisconsin recruited, trained, and 
certified nearly 2,000 volunteers who helped screen more than 220,000 
children and 3,000 adults statewide. Through their hard work, they were 
able to help diagnose hundreds of children who suffered from 
significant vision abnormalities, which, left untreated, could have 
resulted in permanent vision loss.
  Prevent Blindness has a wonderful history of helping children from 
families in need, at-risk adults, and the community to help screen, 
treat, and prevent vision problems from worsening. Their volunteers 
join together with local eye-care professionals to ensure that these 
children can get the treatment they need to protect their vision.
  On behalf of all who have benefited from its efforts, I would like to 
thank Prevent Blindness Wisconsin for all of its work for children, 
adults, and families in Wisconsin. I congratulate Prevent Blindness 
Wisconsin on 50 years of service and wish everyone who makes their work 
possible a joyous anniversary celebration.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 160 (Thursday, October 2, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2211]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                TRIBUTE TO MOUNT CALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. EDOLPHUS TOWNS

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 2, 2008

  Mr. TOWNS. Madam Speaker, it is my honor to rise today on behalf of 
Mount Calvary Baptist Church. This beacon of hope in Harlem has 
provided faith and fellowship for its congregation for 91 years.
  The rich history of this Harlem religious institution began 1917. At 
the time Black laborers were actively recruited to leave the South to 
work in New York's factories. Mount Calvary Baptist Church, among other 
churches, served as a pillar of spiritual sustenance and support for 
this young Black community. Throughout Harlem's tough times including 
devastating riots, poverty, crime, and unemployment, the church has 
continued its invaluable work, inspiring new generations of Harlemites 
to improve their communities and to develop their spiritual potential.
  Mount Calvary Baptist Church, in 1991, began a series of new 
community projects, starting with the Building Trade Training School 
Program and later the church's participation in the ``Angel Tree Prison 
Ministry'' in 1995.
  Mount Calvary Baptist Church has since built on its years of 
community work to found a highly successful men's ministry, women's 
ministry, and prison ministry, as well as sponsoring health workshops 
for men, a youth basketball team, and a Youth Ministry in 2001.
  Mount Calvary Baptist Church, under the adroit leadership of Reverend 
Dr. Adolph Roberts, Senior Pastor, can take pride in its many 
accomplishments in the community. Over the course of its 91-year 
history, the church has served as the spiritual home of thousands of 
men, women, boys, girls, and teenagers, inspiring them with a message 
of hope, deliverance, and prosperity.

                          ____________________
```
#### Phelps Mortgage Company, Appellant, v. Board of Equalization of City of Oskaloosa, Appellee.

Taxation: assessment: estoppel. Consent Toy a taxpayer to an assessment in a specified sum will estop liim from afterwards complaining of such assessment as too high.

*Appeal from MahasTca District Court.*— Hon. D. Ryan, Judge.

Saturday, February 6, 1892.

Appeal hy the plaintiff from an assessment on moneys and credits for the year *1889.*

Affirmed.

*Bolton & McCoy*and *John 0. Malcom,*for appellant.

*C. B. McFall,*for appellee.

Gtven, J.

The appellant is a corporation duly organized under the laws of Iowa for the business of making and selling loans, with the principal place of business in the city of Oskaloosa, Iowa. On the first of January, 1889, the assessor of the city assessed the appellant on moneys and credits in the sum of one thousand dollars, with the consent and approval of Mr. Phelps, president, who signed and swore to the statement. The board of equalization posted the appellant, as provided by law, raising the assessment from one thousand dollars, as fixed by the *611assessor, to thirteen thousand dollars. Mr. Phelps appeared before the hoard, and protested against the assessment of thirteen thousand- dollars, and asked that it he reduced to one thousand dollars, upon which application the assessment was reduced to six thousand dollars, from which the appellant appealed to the district court, where, after full trial, it was reduced to one thousand dollars, from which the appellant appeals to this court.

It will be observed that the president of the appellant company did not question the right of the board to assess the company upon one thousand dollars, moneys and credits, and that the appeal to the district court was from the action of the board refusing, to reduce the assessment to that sum. Mr. Phelps testifies that he gave in one thousand dollars and signed the affidavit, but did not notice what it was on; that he made no objection to a one thousand dollar assessment. “I was willing to pay on one thousand dollars at that time, provided we could do so without trouble.” It does not appear that Mr.' Phelps’s consent to an assessment on one thousand dollars, as expressed to the assessor and to the board, was based upon any condition. Having thus consented to an assessment in the sum fixed by the district court, we think it is now too late for the appellant to raise the question of its liability to any assessment; and therefore the judgment of the district court should be affirmed.
Exhibit 32.4
 Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant To
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (1)
    
    Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K
of the Company for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2008, as 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 (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 Company.
 Dated: October 24, 2008
    
    /s/ Kevin KyserKevin Kyser,Executive Vice President and Chief 
Financial Officer of 

Affiliated Computer Services, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 880 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 880

 To amend the Clean Air Act to remove flammable fuels from the list of 
  substances with respect to which reporting and other activities are 
            required under the risk management plan program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 26, 1999

  Mr. Inhofe introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Clean Air Act to remove flammable fuels from the list of 
  substances with respect to which reporting and other activities are 
            required under the risk management plan program.

    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 ``Fuels Regulatory Relief Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds that, because of their low toxicity and because they 
are regulated sufficiently under other programs, flammable fuels, such 
as propane, should not be included on the list of substances subject to 
the risk management plan program under section 112(r) of the Clean Air 
Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(r)).

SEC. 3. REMOVAL OF FLAMMABLE FUELS FROM RISK MANAGEMENT LIST.

    Section 112(r)(4) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(4)) is 
amended--
            (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (C) as 
        clauses (i) through (iii), respectively, and indenting 
        appropriately;
            (2) by striking ``Administrator shall consider each of the 
        following criteria--'' and inserting the following: 
        ``Administrator--
                    ``(A) shall consider--'';
            (3) in subparagraph (A)(iii) (as designated by paragraphs 
        (1) and (2)), by striking the period at the end and inserting 
        ``; and''; and
            (4) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(B) shall not regulate non-acute toxic flammable 
                fuels when used or stored for fuel purposes or retail 
                sale unless the fuels are hazardous waste.''.
                                 <all>
```
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

RICHARD MICHAEL GOMEZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 09-10494

D.C. No. 5:00-cr-20360-JDF

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Jeremy D. Fogel, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 13, 2010** 

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Richard Michael Gomez appeals from the 21-month sentence imposed upon 

the revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,

and we affirm.

FILED

OCT 05 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-10494

Gomez contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to

sufficiently explain the sentence, and by relying on erroneous facts. The record

reflects that the district court did not procedurally err. See Gall v. United States,

552 U.S. 38, 49-52 (2007); see also United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 993 (9th

Cir. 2008) (en banc). Gomez also contends that the district court erred by failing to

resolve disputed factual issues, in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

32. The record reflects that the district court did not rely upon any disputed

information when imposing the sentence. See United States v. Saeturn, 504 F.3d

1175, 1178-81 (9th Cir. 2007) (concluding that Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(3)(B) is

limited to factual disputes which affect the temporal term of the sentence imposed).

Gomez also contends that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because

the district court relied upon unreliable allegations of new criminal conduct in

arriving at the sentence, and because the above-Guidelines range sentence is

greater than necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing. The record reflects that

the district court considered the appropriate sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. 

§§ 3553(a) and 3583(e), and that the sentence is reasonable in light of the totality

of the circumstances. See United States v. Simtob, 485 F.3d 1058, 1062-63 (9th

Cir. 2007); see also Gall 552 U.S. at 51-52.

AFFIRMED.
3 09-10494
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant To
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (1)
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended June
30, 2007, as 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 (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 Company.
 Dated: August 29, 2007
    
    /s/ John H. Rexford

John H. Rexford,Executive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer of Affiliated Computer Services, Inc.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 160 (Thursday, October 2, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2209]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

              EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT OF 2008

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. DANA ROHRABACHER

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 29, 2008

  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Madam Speaker, today's vote reaffirms the 
independence of Congress and makes it clear that we will not be 
stampeded into spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars in a 
precipitous manner. This legislation would have directed $700 billion 
of the people's money to bailout rich and powerful interests who acted 
irresponsibly. It would have been a classic example of taking from 
those who have been responsible and giving it to those who have not.
  We were told without this effort our country would suffer a financial 
calamity of historic proportion. However, Congress has spoken, and 
today's defeat of the bill is a rebuke of such scare tactics. These 
tactics made many of us even more skeptical of being rushed to act, 
especially when we are being asked to allocate hundreds of billions of 
taxpayer dollars.
  There were no reforms included in the bill that would have addressed 
the initial root causes of this financial mess, so there is no reason 
to believe if we passed the bill that we would not find ourselves in a 
similar crisis and on the edge of a similar economic abyss over and 
over again. The elites in the financial industry wanted us to give them 
a blank check. Well, that's not responsible, and it doesn't take a 
financial genius to predict the resulting special interests feeding 
frenzy. Whether this feeding would ever avert an economic debacle is 
yet to be seen.
  Effective reform takes time, commitment, and cooperation, which were 
obviously not a part of this speeded up, hysteria driven proposal. I 
remain willing to work with all of my colleagues in the House to fix 
our broken financial system. In the end, this bailout proposal was 
socialism for the rich, or better, socialism without a human face. It 
deserved to be defeated.

                          ____________________
```
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-11-00246-CR

TENISHA LATRICE REYNOLDS APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

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

FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Pursuant to a plea bargain, the trial court convicted Appellant Tenisha 

Latrice Reynolds upon her plea of guilty to the state jail felony of prostitution with 

three or more prior convictions and sentenced her to seven months’ 

confinement.2 Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal.

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.

2See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 43.02(c) (West 2011).
2

The trial court’s certification states that this is a plea-bargained case and 

that Appellant has no right of appeal and that Appellant has waived the right of 

appeal. Accordingly, we informed Appellant by letter on June 24, 2011, that this 

case was subject to dismissal unless she or any party showed grounds for 

continuing the appeal on or before July 5, 2011.3 We have received no 

response.

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal,

4

and we deny Appellant’s counsel’s 

motion to withdraw.

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: July 28, 2011

 

3See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).

4See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            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 Annual Report of Dectron Internationale Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended January 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Ness Lakdawala, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (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 result of operations of the
      Company.


/s/ Ness Lakdawala
-----------------------------------------------
Ness Lakdawala
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

Dated: May 1, 2003

This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
purpose.


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Dectron Internationale Inc. and will be retained by Dectron
Internationale Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 159 (Wednesday, October 1, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10339]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

 SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 105--DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF 
         REPRESENTATIVES TO CORRECT THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 6063

  Mr. NELSON of Florida submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
which was considered and agreed to:

                            S. Con. Res. 105

       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 6063, an 
     Act to authorize the programs of the National Aeronautics and 
     Space Administration, and for other purposes, the Clerk of 
     the House of Representatives shall make the following 
     corrections:
       In section 601(b)(2)(A)(iii) of the bill, strike 
     ``Orbiter''.
       In section 611(d)(1) of the bill, strike ``first 
     President'' and insert ``President''.
       In section 611(e)(3) of the bill, strike ``correctly'' and 
     insert ``currently''.
       In section 611(e)(7) of the bill, strike ``extention'' and 
     insert ``extension''.
       In section 612 of the bill, strike ``operations'' and 
     insert ``operational''.
       In section 1119 of the bill, strike ``The Report'' and 
     insert ``The report''.

                          ____________________
```
#### EDWIN HASWELL *vs.*PETER MALLETT.

One enrolled in March, 1864, under the act of 17th February of that year, who was under 45‘at the time of enrollment, is bound to serve in the regular army during the war.

A written paper, signed by the Enrolling Officer, in its terms an exemption, is but a furlough or detail, if *ha officer had no right to grant aa -exemption. '

This was a writ of *habeas corpus*sued out by Haswell for the purpose of being released from service in the regular army as a conscript.

The facts appear from the opinion.of the Court.

*Rogers*and *Moore*for the petitioner.

*Bragg*for Mallett.

Manly, J.

This case turns upon the principles considered in the case of G-oodson, decided at this term. But *37tbe facts of tbe ease being different, .we are conducted to a different conclusion.

. Tbe petitioner was 45 years of age in May l^st. He. bad been exempted anterior to tbe passage of tbe law of the 17th of February, as a miller. After tbe passing of ' that act, vizin tbe month of March, he was enrolled, and .another exemption paper given, which,.after the act of February repealing exemptions in Mich eases, could only operate as a furlough or detail. il<> was afterwards, viz : on tbe UHh of Juno, ordered into camp. He applied for a detail. This was refused. Ho was ordered into .camp, «and sued out this writ.

The enrolment and detail, which took place in March, about two months before he reached the. o,ge of 45, fixed, his status as a sohlior. He was properly enrolled in the body of regular troops, where the term of' service for the war is prescribed by the acts of 1862.

The petitioner must he remanded to custody, and the costs he taxed against him.