alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The State *v.*Benjamin Johnson.

From Robeson.

"Fhe prosecution being removed for trial to another County, the Clerk transmitted tire original indictment, on rvhich tire Defendant was tried and convicted. It Was moved in arrest, that under the act of 1806, the Clerk should have transmitted a copy of the indictment as part of the transcript of the record, and that the Defendant ought to have been tried on this copy. Motion disallowed.

The Defendant was indicted for petit larceny in Cumberland County Court,1 and being convicted, he appealed to the Superior Court. At the term at which the appeal was returned lie filed an affidavit, on which the Court ordered the prosecution to be remeted for trial to Robeson County, and at fall term 1811, of Robeson Superior Court, be was tried and convicted; and it was moved in arrest of judgment, 1st. that he was tried in the Superior Court of Robeson County upon a copy of the record from the County Court of Cumberland, which was not certified under the seal of the Court j 2d. that the Clerk of Cumberland Superior Court transmitted to Robeson Superior Court, the transcript of the record received by him from the Clerk of the'County Court of Cumberland, instead of sending a copy of that record as required by the act of *1806;*and 6d. that the act of 1806, requires a transcript of the record, to be transmitted from one Superior Court to another, and not the original.

Lowrxe, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the Court: In this case the original indictment and not a transcript was sent to Robeson Superior Court, and the Defendant has been tried on it and convicted. Had it not been for the peculiar words of the act of 1806, the objections now urged would never have been thought of. It is a novel objection that the Defendant has been tried on the *202original indictment, and not on a copy. TJie objection is not substantial: for the Defendant by pleading to the , . , , . , original indictment did.not loose any advantage that he could kave bad by being tried on the- transcript. The original is better evidence of the facts charged, and of the finding of the Grand Jury, than any transcript or copy can be. The object of the clause- of the act relied on, is to multiply the chances of a fair and impartial trial by Jury; and as that was in no respect abridged by the Defendant’s taking his trial on the original bill, the reasons offered in arrest, must be overruled. Judgment for the State.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Mark B. Hoffman, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this Amendment No. 3 to the annual report on Form 10-K of Commerce One,Inc.;

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

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

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness ofthe registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and 
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control overfinancial reporting. 

Date: June 3, 2004

/s/ Mark B. Hoffman
No. 86-5972.

#### Patterson *v.*Brady.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certio-rari denied.
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2009 to 12/31/2009Page 1 of 110/24/2014 17:36:29

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Harris 1 Docket (050- 00400)

Work Planning & Practices / LER182 - Work package quality LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

1100

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 1
No. 82-1170.

#### Stuart-Caballero *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1250 

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to use the testimonials of 

former violent extremists or their associates in order to counter terrorist 

recruitment, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 28, 2017 

Mr. FLEISCHMANN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Homeland Security 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to use the 

testimonials of former violent extremists or their associates in order to counter terrorist recruitment, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Combating Terrorist 

5 Recruitment Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DIRECTIVE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Homeland Secu8 rity shall incorporate, to the extent practicable, into DeVerDate Sep 11 2014 01:59 Mar 03, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H1250.IH H1250

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1250 IH

1 partment of Homeland Security efforts to combat terrorist 

2 recruitment and communications the public testimonials 

3 of former violent extremists or their associates, including 

4 friends and family. Such efforts may include the following: 

5 (1) Counter-messaging of foreign terrorist orga6 nization communications and narratives. 

7 (2) Related community engagement and public 

8 education efforts. 

9 (b) COORDINATION.—The Secretary of Homeland Se10 curity shall coordinate the efforts described in subsection 

11 (a) with the heads of other Federal departments and agen12 cies, as appropriate, and, to the extent practicable, engage 

13 nongovernmental and international partners in the identi14 fication and use of testimonials described in such sub15 section. 

16 (c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this Act 

17 may be construed to require the Secretary of Homeland 

18 Security to collect testimonials directly from former vio19 lent extremists or their associates, including friends and 

20 family. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**  EXHIBIT 3.1.5**

 

 

|   |
|--------|
|        |
|        |
|   |

 

 

|   |
|--------|
|        |
|        |
|   |

 

 

|   |
|--------|
|        |
|        |
|   |

 

 

|   |
|--------|
|        |
|        |
|   |

 

 

|   |
|--------|
|        |
|        |
|   |
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2010 to 12/31/2010Page 1 of 203/16/2015 18:26:47

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Salem 1 Docket (050- 00272)

Human-System Interface & Environmnt / IR170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA M - Mechanical V - Troubleshooting 

15

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Procedures & Reference Document / IR112 - Procedure / reference document contains human factors deficienc O - Control Room Ops 

O - Operations

113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 

113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 113 - Procedure / reference document development and maintenance LT X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 

1362

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Problem Identification & Resolution / IR143 - Tracking / trending LTA X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 

150 - Programmatic deficiency X - Site-wide X - Site-wide 

210

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / IR185 - Procedural adherence LTA M - Mechanical V - Troubleshooting 

186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements M - Mechanical V - Troubleshooting 189 - Recognition of adverse condition / questioning attitude LTA O - Control Room Ops 

O - Operations

190 - Failure to stop work / non-conservative decision making V - Troubleshooting 

M - Mechanical

419

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2010 to 12/31/2010Page 2 of 203/16/2015 18:26:47

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Salem 1 Docket (050- 00272)

Procedures & Reference Document / LER111 - Procedure / reference document technical content E - Electrical M - Maintenance / Repair 

15

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 21
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 10-Q AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                         199,393
<SECURITIES>                                       288
<RECEIVABLES>                                  254,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,196
<INVENTORY>                                     27,125
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               531,097
<PP&E>                                         147,207
<DEPRECIATION>                                  72,078
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,372,776
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          488,402
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          117,757
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       120,472
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,410,698
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,372,776
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               154,906
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   46,431
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               124,411
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,588
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (21,750)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,305
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (33,055)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (33,667)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)


</TABLE>
COURT OF A PPEAL S EI GHTH D I STRI CT OF TEX AS ELPASO, TEXAS

I N RE: STEPHEN W . J OHNSON AN D REUBEN R. RI OS, Relators. § § § § § § No. 08-10-00078- CV AN ORI GI

NAL PROCEEDI

NG I N MANDAMUS

MEMORAN DUM OP INION Pending befor e the Court is Relators’ unopposed motion to dismiss this orig inal proce eding
. The motion is gr anted, a

nd the proc eeding is dismi ssed.

GUADA L UPE RI VERA, J ustice Dec ember

8, 2010 Be fore Chew, C.J ., McClure, a nd Rivera, JJ
. Chew, C.J ., not participating
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-11-00509-CR

Juan Leandro Villarreal, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY, 207TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CR2010-295, THE HONORABLE JACK H. ROBISON, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Juan Leandro Villarreal pleaded guilty and judicially confessed to the

offense of aggravated robbery. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 29.03 (West 2011). In addition,

Villarreal pleaded true to an enhancement paragraph alleging a prior felony conviction for attempted

murder, thereby increasing the punishment range under the repeat offender provisions of the penal

code. See id. § 12.42(c)(1) (West 2011) (providing that at trial of first degree felony offense,

defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for life or any term not more than 99 years or less than

15 years upon proof of previous felony conviction). Following a hearing on punishment, the trial

court adjudicated Villarreal guilty, made an affirmative deadly-weapon finding, and assessed

Villarreal’s punishment at confinement for life in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department

of Criminal Justice. See id.
Villarreal’s court-appointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by a

brief concluding that the appeal is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of

Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why there

are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);

Garner v. State, 300 S.W.3d 763, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); see also Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75

(1988).

Villarreal received a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his right to examine

the appellate record and to file a pro se brief. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at

766. No pro se brief or other written response has been filed.

We have reviewed the record, including appellate counsel’s brief, and find no

reversible error. See Anders, 386 U.S. at 744; Garner, 300 S.W.3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State,

178 S.W.3d 824, 826-27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We agree with counsel that the record presents

no arguably meritorious grounds for review and the appeal is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to

withdraw is granted. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

__________________________________________

J. Woodfin Jones, Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Jones, Justices Pemberton and Rose

Affirmed

Filed: May 9, 2012

Do Not Publish

2
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 

Home : Media : News : News Article View

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# Exercise Bell Buoy Wraps Up in Hawaii during RIMPAC 2022

By Courtesy StoryCommander, U.S. 3rd Fleet

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT                

More
#### T.R.V. Associates, Inc., Appellant, v National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., et al., Respondents.

[631 NYS2d 688]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered September 26, 1994, which, *inter alia,*granted the motion of defendant National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh ("National”) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The evidence clearly demonstrates that Walter Kaye Associates was an insurance broker for plaintiff and not an insurance agent of defendant National. Accordingly, any negligence on the part of Walter Kaye in procuring insurance for plaintiff cannot be imputed to defendant National *(see, Matco Prods. v Boston Old Colony Ins. Co.,*104 AD2d 793, 796). Indeed, National has performed its obligations pursuant to the insurance policy in effect at the time of plaintiff’s loss. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.
Human Factors Information System (HFIS)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

From 01/01/2010 to 12/31/2010Page 1 of 103/16/2015 18:38:00

2x N

Total 

N

Document Types: IR, LER IR/LER Category Analysis by Docket Report

N

Average for Se

Details Department Work Type 

Facility Name: Surry 2 Docket (050- 00281)

Human-System Interface & Environmnt / IR170 - HSI or information availability / quality LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

17

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Procedures & Reference Document / IR111 - Procedure / reference document technical content M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

17

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Problem Identification & Resolution / IR140 - Problem not completely or accurately identified M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 140 - Problem not completely or accurately identified M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 142 - Operating experience (OE) review LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 146 - Evaluation LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 146 - Evaluation LTA E - Electrical M - Maintenance / Repair 148 - Action not yet started or untimely M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 

643

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Work Planning & Practices / IR181 - Inadequate staffing / task allocation A - Administrative Support A - Administrative 

185 - Procedural adherence LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 185 - Procedural adherence LTA E - Electrical M - Maintenance / Repair 185 - Procedural adherence LTA M - Mechanical M - Maintenance / Repair 186 - Failure to take action / meet requirements A - Administrative Support A - Administrative 189 - Recognition of adverse condition / questioning attitude LTA M - M - Mechanical Maintenance / Repair 

643

Number of Items for this Docket: 

Percent of Total for this Docket: 

Total Items for this Docket: 14
No. D-585.

#### In re Disbarment of Reynolds.

[For earlier order herein, see *ante,*p. 927.]

Disbarment entered.
*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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 01-20110

_____________________

EARL VAN JONES, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GUY WILLIAMS, Individually, and as

Sheriff of Montgomery County, Texas;

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, TEXAS, Defendants-Appellees.

_____________________

No. 01-20355

_____________________

MICHAEL ROGER SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GUY WILLIAMS, Individually, and as

Sheriff of Montgomery County, Texas;

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, TEXAS, Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

H-99-CV-972 & H-99-CV-2590

_________________________________________________________________

August 29, 2002

Before GARWOOD, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After review of the record, we find that we must remand these

cases for further proceedings, including a trial if necessary. Our

opinion today, however, should not prejudice the right of the

district court, after hearing the evidence, to grant a directed
2

verdict, or a judgment as a matter of law, nor should it prejudice

the right of this court on any subsequent review of the evidence to

find it insufficient to support a finding in favor of the

plaintiff.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Titus Stephens, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 2.)

[632 NYS2d 991]

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Same Memorandum as in *People v Stephens*([appeal No. 1] 219 AD2d 854 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Judgment of Ontario County Court, Harvey, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present — Lawton, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Davis and Boehm, JJ.