alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION

File Name: 11a0736n.06

No. 10-6558

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

CLINTON TURNER,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF

TENNESSEE

Before: BATCHELDER, Chief Judge; MARTIN and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges.

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. Clinton Turner argues that the district court miscalculated 

his recommended sentence when it applied a cross reference to attempted second-degree murder

based on a depraved heart. The United States agrees. The parties are right, so we vacate Turner’s

sentence and remand for resentencing. 

The facts, as the district court found them, show that on August 9, 2009, Turner—while

under the influence of alcohol, prescription medication, and crack cocaine—came out of his home

wielding a shotgun. There he met his wife, Bonnie Ruffin, and two others. Turner fired the shotgun

once into the air and then pointed it at Ruffin and the others, but did not fire. Another man, James

Gates, attempted to wrestle the gun away from Turner. In the ensuing struggle, the gun went off and
No. 10-6558

United States v. Turner

severely injured Ruffin. The district court found at sentencing that Turner’s actions were extremely

reckless, but that Turner did not intend to kill Ruffin (or anyone else).

Turner pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. His presentence investigation

report calculated a base offense level of 33 based on a cross reference to attempted first-degree

murder under § 2A2.1(a)(1) of the Guidelines. The district court rejected that cross reference in light

of its finding that Turner did not intend to kill Ruffin. At the government’s urging, however, the

court applied a cross reference to attempted second-degree murder under § 2A2.1(a)(2), on the theory

that Turner acted with a depraved heart. 

The government has since changed its mind, conceding that Turnershould not have received

the cross reference to § 2A2.1(a)(2). The government is correct. Under federal law, a defendant

cannot be guilty of attempted murder without a specific intent to kill. See Braxton v. United States,

500 U.S. 344, 351 n.* (1991) (quoting 4 C. Torcia, Wharton’s Criminal Law § 743, p. 522 (14th ed.

1981)) (“Although murder may be committed without an intent to kill, an attempt to commit murder

requires a specific intent to kill”). The same is true under Tennessee state law. See State v.

Kimbrough, 924 S.W.2d 888, 891 (Tenn. 1996). Simply stated, the cross reference here was to a

crime that does not exist. See generally 2 Wayne R. Lafave, Substantive Criminal Law § 11.3(a),

at 212–13 (2d ed. 2003) (footnotes omitted).

The erroneous cross reference caused the district court to miscalculate Turner’s Guidelines

range, which in turn makes his sentence procedurally unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552

U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Thus, we vacate Turner’s sentence and remand for re-sentencing.

-2-
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 39 (Friday, February 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 10684]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04043]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Notice to All Interested Parties of the Termination of the 
Receivership of 10201, American National Bank, Parma, Ohio

    Notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation (``FDIC'') as Receiver for American National Bank, Parma, 
Ohio (``the Receiver'') intends to terminate its receivership for said 
institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of American National Bank 
on March 19, 2010. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been 
completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance 
with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to 
proven creditors.
    Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the 
continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. 
Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be 
terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date 
of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the 
termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing 
and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and 
Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 34.1, 1601 
Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.
    No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be 
considered which are not sent within this time frame.

    Dated: February 23, 2015.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-04043 Filed 2-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-7217

GEORGE W. GANTT-EL, 

 Petitioner - Appellant, 

 v. 

RICKY ANDERSON, 

 Respondent - Appellee. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Donald P. Dietrich, 

Magistrate Judge. (1:09-cv-00040-UA-DPD) 

Submitted: November 19, 2009 Decided: December 2, 2009 

Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

George W. Gantt-El, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2 

PER CURIAM: 

 George W. Gantt-El seeks to appeal the district 

court’s orders (1) denying him leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis in his action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 

(2006), and ordering him to pay the $5 filing fee, and 

(2) granting him an extension of time to pay the fee. Our 

review of the district court docket sheet and Gantt-El’s 

informal brief on appeal reveals that the filing fee was paid on 

June 16, 2009. Accordingly, because Gantt-El has paid the 

filing fee, we deny his motion for a certificate of 

appealability and dismiss the appeal as moot. We deny leave to 

proceed in forma pauperis on appeal and deny Gantt-El’s motion 

for judicial notice. We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before the court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1

                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 filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
International Thoroughbred Breeders, Inc. (the "Company") for the three and six
months ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Francis W. Murray, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
the best of my knowledge:

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



 /s/ Francis W. Murray
 ------------------------------
 Name:   Francis W. Murray
 Title:  President and CEO, CFO
 February 23, 2004
##### 



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 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: February 11, 2008
    /s/ Christina W. HaganChristina W. HaganExecutive Vice President, Secretary and
Chief Financial Officer
(principal financial and accounting officer)
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.6
 
                                    CONSENT
 
  I hereby consent to the reference to me in the Schedule 14A of XTRA
Corporation (the "Company") and in the Proxy Statement/Prospectus forming a
part of the Registration Statement on Form S-4 of the Company relating to the
merger of Wheels MergerCo LLC ("MergerCo"), a newly organized Delaware limited
liability company formed solely for the purpose of consummating the
transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger and
Recapitalization, dated as of June 18, 1998, as amended and restated as of
July 31, 1998, between the Company and MergerCo, with and into the Company.
 
 
                                                   /s/ Martin Tuchman
                                          -------------------------------------
                                                     Martin Tuchman
 
October 20, 1998
 
 
                                       1
REF ID:A58275 

CONFIDEN'f'IAL e Seettri~y Infm ma:tion 

USCIB: 2/32 

1 July 1953 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE MDl:BERS OF USCIB: 

Subject: Availability of Unclassified COMINT Equipment 

for Friendly Foreign Governments. 

Reference: USCIB 2/.31, dated '1!J May 1953. 

The enclosure, prepared by the A.C. of s., G-2, Department 

of the Army, to note certain discrepancies in the reference, is 

forwarded for information. 

Enclosure 

G-2 - ASA Memo 

dated 11 June 1953. 

USCIB: 2/32 

GONli'IDEJN'fiAL 

USCIB 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-13-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 

24 
REF ID:A58275 

c 

0 

p 

y 

OOHFIDEN'i'IAL e 

DEP.A,R'IMENT OF THE ARMY 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT CHIEF OF STAFF, G-2, INTELLIGENCE 

WASHING'IDN 25, D. C. 

00NFIBEfi'lIAil Si!i0URii'¥ :ENPORMA'l'±ON 

G2-ASA 

MEMORANDUM TO: Executive Secretary, USCIB 

11 JUN 1953 

SUBJECT: Availability of Unclassified COMINT Equipment for 

Friendly Foreign Governments 

1. Reference is made to the inclosure of Memorandum for the: 

Members of USCIB, subject: Availability of Unclassified COMINT 

Equipment for Friendly Foreign Governments, dated 2!I May 1953 

(Serial: Ol~S}. · 

2. Upon review of the Board pa.per, certain discrepancies were 

noted and a.re listed below: 

a. Paragraph a. - Direction Finder Set AN/PRD-1 - The estimated unit cost of this item is approximate:ty $4,900 and not $11,000. 

b. Paragraph e - Radio Set SCR-504 - Estimated cost of this 

item is $3,000, not $12,000. 

c. Paragraph f - The Signal Corps has approximately one 

hundred (100) of these on procurement for ASA requirements. The 

quantity of 12 ea.ch referred to is only the Fixed Plant requirement. 

CONPIDElN'ffAL 

(Signed) 

HARRY R. BOYD 

Colonel, GS 

Acting Executive
~FJR~= A5905. 

24 

USCIB: 14.6/1 

23 June 1954 

MFMORANDUH FOR THE Ml!MBERS OF uscm: 

Subject: Visits to GCHQ. 

'lb.e Director, National Security Agency has forwarded the following 

information, received from SUSLO, London, with a request that it be 

provided to the members of USCIB: 

"Accommodations and transportation for visitors to GCHQ will 

be very difficult to obtain during the August holiday and horse 

;racing season in Cheltenham, Fllgland. For this reason it is 

requested that visits to GCHQ planned for August be postponed 

until September or October." 

JONES 

Secrets.rt, USCIB 

USCIB: U..6/1 

SECRET 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 03-05-2014 pursuantto E.O. 1352a
**EXHIBIT 21**

 

 

|  

**List Of Subsidiaries**

 

Optimal Payments Inc., a Canadian corporation4295382 Canada Inc. (formerly FireCash Ltd.), a Canadian corporationOptimal Payments Holdings Limited, an English corporationOptimal Payments Limited, an English corporationOptimal Payments Corp., a Delaware corporationMicro Tempus Corporation, a Delaware corporation3507637 Canada Inc., a Canadian corporation

Online Processing Limited, an Israeli corporation

 

Optimal Payments (Ireland)Limited (formerly FireOne Group plc), an Irish corporation

OG Processing Services Holdings, an Irish corporation

4287258 Canada Inc., a Canadian corporation

FPA Processing Services Inc., a New Brunswick corporation

op2pay Ltd. (formerly FirePay Ltd.),a Bermuda corporation

FirePay UK Limited, an English corporation

Optimal Acquisition Inc., a Canadian corporation

 

WowWee Canada Inc., a Canada corporation

WowWee USA, Inc., a Delaware corporation

Optimal Robotics USA, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company

OR Holdings Limited, a Bermuda corporation

WowWee Group Limited, a Hong Kong corporation

 

  |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 21



                          Subsidiary of the Registrant


Subsidiary                               State of Incorporation
----------                               ----------------------

Coastal Bank                             Maine
N OTE : This o rder is non precedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
JIMMI TYLER REBISH, Petitioner,

v.

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTEC TION BOARD
, Respondent.

______________________

2014

- 3085

______________________
Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. SF- 1221

- 13

- 0494 -W-1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Jimmi Tyler Rebish moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Departme nt of the Interior moves to

reca ption this matter to designate the Merit Systems Protection Board as the respondent.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7703(a)(2), the Board is desi gnated as the respondent when the Board ’ s decision co ncerns the procedure or jurisdiction of the Board. The employing agency is designated as the respondent when the Case: 14-3085 Document: 17 Page: 1 Filed: 09/03/2014REBISH v. MSPB 2

Board reaches the merits of the underlying case. We determine that the Board should be designated as the respondent.

Accordingly

, I T I S O RDERED T HAT : (1) The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted.

(2) The motion to reca ption is granted. The revised official caption is reflected above.

(3) The Board’s informal brief is due within 21 days from the date of filing of this order.

F OR THE C OURT

/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court

s24 Case: 14-3085 Document: 17 Page: 2 Filed: 09/03/2014
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-04-2000
<CASH>                                             955
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,315
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      3,889
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,291
<PP&E>                                          21,010
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,632
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,267
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,139
<BONDS>                                          3,135
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           236
<OTHER-SE>                                      13,448
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    25,267
<SALES>                                         17,486
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,486
<CGS>                                           15,162
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,162
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,453
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    25
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  93
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,247)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (272)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,975)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,975)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.42)


</TABLE>
# CE2004084EN.01032101.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/321 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/321

---

(2004/C 84 E/0369)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0156/04

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 January 2004)

Subject:   Commission's accounting systems

Subject:

I understand that the Internal Audit Service, in a report entitled ‘IAS Review of the Commission's Accounting Framework — Final Report’ dated 15 April 2003, made a number of recommendations to the Commission regarding the accounting systems.

Has the Commission carried out an independent feasibility study on the re-engineering of the Commission processes and the ‘off-the-shelf’ software solutions available on the market?

Has the Commission made available a project manager and an independent external consultant?

Could the Commission guarantee that there now exists an integrated accounting system fully compliant with the Financial Regulations?

---
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Petroleum Helicopters, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 (the "Report"), I,
Lance F. Bospflug, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify 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.

Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.



By: /s/ Lance F. Bospflug
    ----------------------------------------
      Lance F. Bospflug
      President and Chief Executive Officer
      May 13, 2003
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 5
                        [LETTERHEAD OF HAYTHE & CURLEY]
                                 June 4, 1999

Talk Visual Corporation
One Canal Park, 3rd Floor
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142

Dear Sirs:

          We have acted as counsel for Talk Visual Corporation, a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), in connection with the registration statement on
Form S-8 being filed by the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, with respect to 320,000 shares (the "Shares") of the Company's common
stock, $.001 par value (the "Common Stock"), which may be issued by the Company
pursuant to the Company's 1999 Stock Compensation Plan (the "Plan").

          In connection with such registration statement, we have examined such
records and documents and such questions of law as we have deemed appropriate
for purposes of this opinion.  On the basis of such examination, we advise you
that in our opinion the Shares have been duly and validly authorized and, when
issued in accordance with the terms of the Plan, will be validly issued, fully
paid and non-assessable.

     We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
foregoing registration statement.

                         Very truly yours,

                         /s/ Haythe & Curley
#### D. C. MAXWELL *v.*H. M. CALDWELL, Adm’r and others.

When a Judge belo ® refuses to give a judgment prayed for, (except in the case of Ms refusal to grant an Injunction,) no appeal lies to this Court,

Civil Actioe, to recover the amount of certain notes, and that certain land shall be charged with the payment of the same, heard before *Sahenok, J.,*at the Fall Term, 1874, of Cabarrus Superior Court.

No statement of facts is necessary in this case.

From the refusal of his Honor to give judgment on the pleadings, the plaintiff appealed.

*Barringer,*for appellant.

*Montgomery*and *Walker,*contra.

RodMAN, J.

No appeal will lie from a mere refusal of the Judge to give a judgment prayed for, (except in the case of his refusal to grant an injunction.)

The Judge here gives no judgment. Let this opinion be certified.

Pee Cuijiam. Case remanded to be proceeded in according to law.
Exhibit 21.1

                      LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
                 OF GOLD BANC CORPORATION, INC.

GBC Oklahoma, Inc.
Central Oklahoma Leasing Authority, Inc. (a subsidiary of GBC
   Oklahoma, Inc.)
People First Bank, Hennessey, Oklahoma (a subsidiary of GBC
   Oklahoma, Inc.)
First State Holding Company of Elkhart (a subsidiary of GBC
   Oklahoma, Inc.)
People First Bank, Elkhart, Kansas (a subsidiary of GBC
   Oklahoma, Inc. and First State Holding Company of Elkhart)
American Heritage Bancorp, Inc. (a subsidiary of GBC
   Oklahoma, Inc.)
American Heritage Bank, El Reno, Oklahoma (a subsidiary of
   GBC Oklahoma, Inc. and American Heritage Bancorp, Inc.)
CB Acquisition Corp. (a subsidiary of GBC Oklahoma, Inc.)

GBC Florida, Inc.
American Bank (a subsidiary of GBC Florida, Inc.)
ABI Capital Trust (a subsidiary of GBC Florida, Inc.)

GBC Kansas, Inc.
Gold Bank (a subsidiary of GBC Kansas, Inc.)
Gold Banc Financial Services, Inc. (a subsidiary of Gold Bank)
Gold IHC, Inc. (a subsidiary of Gold Bank)
Gold RE Holdings, Inc. (a subsidiary of Gold IHC, Inc.)

Regional Holding Company, Inc. (a subsidiary of Gold Bank)
Gold Banc Mortgage, Inc. (a subsidiary of Regional Holding
   Company, Inc.)
Realty Escrow Services, Inc. (a subsidiary of Regional Holding
   Company, Inc.)

Gold IHC-II, LLC
Gold RE Holdings-II, LLC (a subsidiary of Gold IHC-II, LLC)

Gold Banc Acquisition Corporation IX, Inc.
Gold Banc Acquisition Corporation X, Inc.
Gold Banc Acquisition Corporation V, Inc.

GBCI Capital Trust
GBCI Capital Trust II

Gold Holdings, Inc.

Midwest Capital Management, Inc.

Citizens Bank of Tulsa
Citizens-BK Holdings, Inc. (a subsidiary of Citizens Bank of
   Tulsa)

The Trust Company

CompuNet Engineering, Inc.
<PAGE>
Provident Bank f.s.b
Gold IHC-I, L.L.C. (a subsidiary of Provident Bank f.s.b.)
Gold RE Holdings-I, LLC (a subsidiary of Gold IHC-I, L.L.C.)
<PAGE>