alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07

- 20

- 00209

- CR
JOHNNY FLORES , A

PPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 1 06 th District Court

Lynn County , Texas Trial Court No
. 17 , 3232 , Honorable Carter T. Schildknecht , Presiding 

### September 22 , 2021 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN , C.J. , and PARKER and DOSS , JJ. Johnny Flores appeals his conviction for causing serious bodily injury to an elderly
person , his father. The sole issue before us concerns whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support the conviction. Flores does not contest that he assaulted hi s father and caused him bodily injury. Rather , he argues that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that his victim suffered serious bodily injury. We affirm. The opinion in Hammack v. State , 622 S.W.3d 910 (Tex. Crim. App. 202 1) , discusses the pertinent standard of review. We apply it here.2

Next , o ne commits the offense in question when he in tentionally , knowingly , or recklessly

ca uses serious bodily injury to a n elderly individual by act or omission

. T EX

. P ENAL C ODE A NN

. § 22.04(a)(1). Furthermore , “ s erious bodily injury ” means bodily injury creating a substantial risk of death or that causes death , serious permanent disfigurement , or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ. Id. § 1.07(a)(46). Here , t he record contains evidence that the beating appellant inflicted upon his father left the 69

- year - old man with bleeding from his mouth , bruising , a hematoma on the right part of his head , bruising to his right eye and right ja w , brui sing under his left
eye , and a brain hemorrhage or bleeding within the brain

. When the state ’ s medical expert was asked , “ by definition , is a bleed inside the brain a serious bodily injury , ” the physician answered , “ yes. ” That the hemorrhage may be small did not affect the seriousness the injury posed , as ex plained by the doctor. They have to be taken seriously because “ you could have a small petechial bleed that becomes devastating that kills somebody , ” according to the medical professional. The physi cian ’ s categorization of a brain hemorrhage as “ serious bodily injury , ” the risk of death posed by even a small intercranial bleed , and the other evidence alluded above comprise s some evidence upon which a rational jur or could conclude , beyond reasonable doubt , that appellant caused his father serious bodily injury as a result of beating him. Accordingly , we overrule appellant ’ s issue and affirm the judgment of the trial court. Per Curi a m

Do not publish.
IA 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 72 

Relating to the disapproval of the proposed foreign military sale to the 

Government of Kenya of Air Tractor aircraft with weapons, and related 

support. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 14, 2017 

Mr. BUDD (for himself and Mr. HUNTER) submitted the following joint 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Relating to the disapproval of the proposed foreign military 

sale to the Government of Kenya of Air Tractor aircraft 

with weapons, and related support. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That the issuance of a letter of offer with respect to any 

4 of the following proposed sales to the Government of 

5 Kenya (described in the certification Transmittal No. 16– 

6 79, sent to the Speaker of the House of Representatives 

7 and the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations 

8 of the Senate pursuant to section 36(b)(1) of the Arms 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HJ 72 IH 

1 Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(b)(1))) on January 

2 19, 2017, is hereby prohibited: 

3 (1) Twelve Air Tractor AT–802L. 

4 (2) Two AT–504 trainer aircraft. 

5 (3) Weapons package, technical support and 

6 program management. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
                                                                 Exhibit 11.1
                        EQUITY CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL
                   COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
(In thousands, except per share data)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Three months ended      Nine months ended
                                  Sept. 30,                Sept. 30,
                               1997        1996         1997        1996
<S>                            <C>         <C>          <C>         <C>
Computation of earnings per 
  common and equivalent share:
Net income attributable to 
  common stock................ $    3,174  $    2,112   $   10,720  $    6,994
                               ==========  ==========   ==========  ==========
Weighted average number of
  common shares outstanding...     20,705      19,148       20,485      17,312
Additional shares assuming 
  conversion of stock options.        350         278          336         255
Effect of restricted stock 
  issued......................         23          21           21          16
                               ----------  ----------     --------    --------

Weighted average shares for 
primary earnings per share....     21,078      19,447       20,842      17,583

Incremental shares issuable 
  using quarter-end market 
    price:
      Conversion of stock 
        options...............          6          20           14          18
      Effect of restricted 
        stock issued..........          1           2            1           2
                               ----------  ----------   ----------  ----------

Weighted average shares for 
  fully diluted earnings 
    per share.................     21,085      19,469       20,857      17,603
                               ==========  ==========   ==========  ==========

Primary earnings per common 
  and equivalent share........ $     0.15  $     0.11   $    0.516  $     0.40
                               ==========  ==========   ==========  ==========

Fully diluted earnings per 
  common and equivalent share. $     0.15  $     0.11   $     0.51  $     0.40
                               ==========  ==========   ==========  ==========
</TABLE>
115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 42 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Labor 

relating to drug testing of unemployment compensation 

applicants. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the De4 partment of Labor relating to ‘‘Federal-State 
2 

•HJ 42 EH 

1 Unemployment Compensation Program; Middle Class Tax 

2 Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 Provision on Estab3 lishing Appropriate Occupations for Drug Testing of Un4 employment Compensation Applicants’’ (published at 81 

5 Fed. Reg. 50298 (August 1, 2016)), and such rule shall 

6 have no force or effect. 

Passed the House of Representatives February 15, 

2017. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 42 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department 

ment compensation applicants. of Labor relating to drug testing of unemploy-
**                               **                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1.

Certification of Principal Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Dr. Thomas Drees, Chief Executive Officer, and David Nelson, Principal Accounting Officer, of Sanguine Corporation (the "Registrant") do hereby 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 our knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period June 30, 2010 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

    (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

 

Dated:  August 16, 2010

By:  /s/ Dr. Thomas Drees

                            

        Dr. Thomas Drees

                           

        Chief Executive Officer

By:  /s/  David Nelson

        David Nelson, Chief Financial Officer

 * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Sanguine Corporation and will be retained by Sanguine Corporation and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**EXHIBIT 23.2****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**AMERCOReno, NV     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-3 (no. 333-10119,333-73357, 333-48396 and 33-56571) of AMERCO and consolidatingentities of our report dated June 16, 2005, relating to theconsolidated financial statements of SAC Holding II Corporationand its subsidiaries’ consolidated in the Company’sAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the year endedMarch 31, 2005.     /s/ Semple &    Cooper, LLPPhoenix, ArizonaJune 21, 2005
### 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 May 25, 2010

s0517 

# Order

May 25, 2010

140006

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140006 COA: 292335 Wayne CC: 03-011642-FH CHARLES HOLLOWAY II, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 28, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is considered , and it is DENIED, because the defendant has
failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
Exhibit 24.8**POWER OF ATTORNEY**KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS     WHEREAS, ALCAN INC., a Canadian corporation (the “Company”), proposes shortly to file with theSecurities and Exchange Commission, under the provisions of the Securities Act of 1934 as amended(the “Act”), the Annual Report on Form 10-K pursuant to Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Act.     WHEREAS, the undersigned is an Officer and/or a Director of the Company as indicated below;     NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints R. Millington, D. McAuslandand P. Chenard and each of them, as attorneys for the undersigned and in the undersigned’s name,place and stead, and in each of the undersigned’s offices and capacities as an Officer and/or aDirector of the Company, to execute and file such Annual Report on Form 10-K, hereby giving andgranting to said attorneys full power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thingwhatsoever requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises as fully, to all intentsand purposes, as the undersigned might or could do if personally present at the doing thereof,hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys may or shall lawfully do, or cause to bedone, by virtue hereof.     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 27th day of February 2007.         Signed: /s/ Guy Saint-Pierre   Name:  Guy Saint-Pierre   Title:  Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         501
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  692
<ALLOWANCES>                                   122
<INVENTORY>                                    157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,294
<PP&E>                                         2,816
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,646
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2,464
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          67,799
<BONDS>                                        193
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       9,331
<OTHER-SE>                                     (75,786)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   (2,464)
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,370
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3,312
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             7
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (113)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (113)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (113)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.08)


</TABLE>
#### Miguel Carrasco, Appellant, v Aurora Mendez, Respondent.

[773 NYS2d 605]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated January 24, 2003, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant made a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955 [1992]). The affirmation of the plaintiffs physician submitted in opposition to the defendant’s motion was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact.

Accordingly, the defendant was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Santucci, J.P., Smith, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

             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 Mattson  Technology,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended  September 26, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Ludger
Viefhues, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies,  pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 ("Section 906"), that:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) 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.

Dated: November 5, 2004

                                                     By:   /s/ LUDGER VIEFHUES
                                                         -----------------------
                                                              Ludger Viefhues
                                                         Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FILED WITH FORM 10-QSB FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           500
<OTHER-SE>                                       (500)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
January 12, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S317 

period of morning business for up to 1 

hour, with Senators permitted to speak 

for up to 10 minutes each, with the 

time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling 

the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half; that following 

morning business, the Senate resume 

consideration of S. 22, the wilderness 

bill. 

I further ask that the filing deadline 

for first-degree amendments be 2:30 

p.m. tomorrow and that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. to 

allow for the weekly caucus luncheons. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 10 A.M. 

TOMORROW 

Mr. REID. Mr. President, if there is 

no further business to come before the 

Senate, I ask unanimous consent that 

it stand adjourned under the previous 

order. 

There being no objection, the Senate, 

at 7:09 p.m., adjourned until Tuesday, 

January 13, 2009, at 10 a.m. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with SENATE
Date:

 Time:

 Location:

 

UAV Pilot pre-flight checklist:

Physical inspection of UAV:

Notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Physical inspection of Remote Control: 

Notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Proper personnel on-site:

Notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Proper notifications and permissions received, Property owner/manager, FAA, 

COA,_________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Weather conditions: 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Safe distance perimeter set:______________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Flight 

notes:________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________
1 The Honorable Harry F. Barnes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-1137

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. Jesus Trevino-Celaya, also known as * Arturo Torres Medina, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: May 31, 2002 Filed: June 5, 2002

___________ Before HANSEN, Chief Judge, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Jesus Trevino-Celaya appeals the sentence imposed by the district court 1 upon remand for resentencing, arguing that the court should have departed downward from the applicable Sentencing Guidelines range. Having thoroughly reviewed the record, we affirm the judgment. See U.S.S.G. §§ 5H1.6, 5K2.19; United States v. King , 280 F.3d 886, 889 (8th Cir. 2002); United States v. Maldonado , 242 F.3d 1, 4-5 (1st Cir. 2001).-2- A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<PAGE>

32.1    Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
        of VOXEL pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002


                            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 on Form 10-Q of VOXEL (the "Company")
for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Michael Anthony,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of VOXEL, 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 results of operations of the Company.

Dated: June 17, 2008


                                    /s/ Michael Anthony
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Michael Anthony
                                    Chief Executive Officer


                                    /s/ Michael Anthony
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Michael Anthony
                                    Chief Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRANDON K. SUMMERS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 110 MAL 2021

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 12th day of April, 2022

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.