alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Principal Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350

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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Capella Education Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Lois M. Martin, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/ Lois M. Martin                               
|Lois M. Martin                                   
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|July 31, 2008                                    

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

# toIP

# r
REGION Ill 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 191 03-2029

David K. Paylor, Director Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality 629 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Mr. Paylor: 

### MAY 15Z014

On March 25,2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a revision to the Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Department ofEnvironmental Quality pertaining to removal ofthe Stage II gasoline vapor recovery program from the attainment and maintenance plans for the Virginiajurisdictions located in the ozone transport region (OTR). EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a direct final rulemaking notice. If members of your staffhave any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Asrah Khadr, at (215) 814-2071, or at khadr.asrah@epa.gov. She is the principal contact for this rulemaking. Sincerely,

### ~ 1 / '

# ~/#l-t1**,** 

# r/ Diana Esher, Director Air Protection Division



## Q Printed on 100% recycled/recyclablepaper with 100%post-consumer fiber and process chlorine free. Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Trevor Edward Hill, Appellant

No. 06

- 18

- 00125

- CR v.
The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 241st District Court of Smith County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 241

- 0661

- 17 ). Opinion delivered by Justice Burgess, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial cou rt

. We note that the appellant, Trevor Edward Hill, has adequately indicated his inability to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JANUA RY 29, 2019 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 32. 1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICERS PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

The following
certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any filings.

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

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 on Form 10-Q
of Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated, a Delaware corporation, for the second quarter ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, each of the undersigned officers of Advanced Analogic Technologies
Incorporated certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his respective knowledge:

(1) the accompanying report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the second quarter 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, as amended; and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated for the periods presented therein.

Date: July 29, 2008



/s/ Richard K. WilliamsRichard K. WilliamsChief Executive Officer


Date: July 29, 2008



/s/ Brian R. McDonaldBrian R. McDonaldChief Financial Officer


A signed original of the above certification has been provided to Advanced Analogic
Technologies Incorporated and will be retained by Advanced Analogic Technologies Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RIVER MASCARI,

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

 State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-16-00278-CR

Appeal from the

210th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 20130D00686)

O R D E R

The trial court judge has verbally informed the Clerk’s Office that Appellant does not 

have a right to appeal. The trial court has not, however, entered a written certification of the 

Appellant’s right to appeal as required by the Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX.R.APP.P.

25.2(d), Appendix D. Accordingly, the trial court is ordered to enter the required certification 

and file it with the trial court clerk within thirty days of the date of this order. See Cortez v. 

State, 420 S.W.3d 803 806-07 (Tex.Crim.App. 2013). If the trial court is unable to obtain the 

defendant’s signature on the certification, the trial court should nevertheless certify whether 

Appellant has a right to appeal and file the certification without the Appellant’s signature. The 

trial court clerk shall provide a copy of the certification to this Court as soon as possible, but not 

later than three days after it is filed. See TEX.R.APP.P. 25.2(e). 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 7

th day of December, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Hughes, JJ.
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Platon Tzouvalis hereby certifies, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

|1. | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Acrongenomics Inc.
      for the period ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
      and
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                         
|2. | information contained in the quarterly report on Form
      10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of Acrongenomics Inc..                              

Date: May 15, 2009



| | /s/
      Platon Tzouvalis   
| | -----------------------------
| | Platon Tzouvalis             
| | President and Director       
| | (Principal Executive Officer)



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Acrongenomics
Inc. and will be retained by Acrongenomics Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-40078 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JAIME ENRIQUE ARGUMENDO-BATRAS Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:02-CR-216-1 Before DAVIS, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jaime Enrique Argumendo-Batras has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Argumendo-Batras has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s briefdiscloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave towithdrawis GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 10, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


         In connection  with the  accompanying  Annual Report of Radale Imports,
Inc.  (the  "Company")  on Form  10-KSB for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005
(the "Report"), I, Lee D. Dodson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify that to my knowledge:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.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:  July 14, 2005

                                                      /s/ Lee D. Dodson
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Lee D. Dodson
                                                     Chief Executive Officer


         The above  certification is furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  ss.1350)  and is not being filed as
part of the Form 10-KSB or as a separate disclosure document.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7071

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAMON EMANUEL ELLIOTT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, Senior District Judge. 

(8:97-cr-00053-PJM-1; 8:16-cv-02697-PJM)

Submitted: November 22, 2016 Decided: November 28, 2016

Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Damon Emanuel Elliott, Appellant Pro Se. Lindsay Eyler Kaplan, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Damon Emanuel Elliott seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing as successive his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. 

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge 

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief 

on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating 

that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate 

both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that 

the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a 

constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Elliott has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Sally L. Edwards, Chief Financial Officer of DDi Corp. (the Company) certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
March 31, 2009 (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 result of operations of
the Company for the period covered by the Report.



/s/ SALLY L. EDWARDSSally L. EdwardsChief Financial Officer


Date: April 30, 2009
# C_2016197EN.01000301.xml

| 3.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 197/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

2 June 2016

(2016/C 197/03)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1188 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 121,96 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4383 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,77335 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2945 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1062 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,3360 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,029 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 313,02 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3903 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5200 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2973 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5516 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4662 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6932 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6474 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5399 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 329,35 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,4454 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3639 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4975 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 268,82 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6495 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,107 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 75,0420 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,829 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,0235 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,7779 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,2970 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1188

JPY

Japanese yen

121,96

DKK

Danish krone

7,4383

GBP

Pound sterling

0,77335

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2945

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1062

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,3360

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,029

HUF

Hungarian forint

313,02

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3903

RON

Romanian leu

4,5200

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2973

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5516

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4662

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6932

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6474

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5399

KRW

South Korean won

1 329,35

ZAR

South African rand

17,4454

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3639

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4975

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 268,82

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6495

PHP

Philippine peso

52,107

RUB

Russian rouble

75,0420

THB

Thai baht

39,829

BRL

Brazilian real

4,0235

MXN

Mexican peso

20,7779

INR

Indian rupee

75,2970

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

345 

CA 16-01647 

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND NEMOYER, JJ. 

 

RYAN M. FORRESTEL, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MARGUERITA M.C. JONKMAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

(APPEAL NO. 3.) 

 

MARGUERITA M.C. JONKMAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE. 

JOHN P. PIERI, BUFFALO, FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Tracey A.

Bannister, J.), entered December 21, 2015. The order denied the

recusal motion of defendant. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in Forrestel v Jonkman ([appeal No. 1] ___

AD3d ___ [Mar. 24, 2017]).

Entered: March 24, 2017 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
#### State vs. Cole.

Under sec. 1, ch. 118, R. S., a qualified elector of this state who is not also a citizen of the United States is not qualified to serve as a grand juror.

Where one of the grand jury by which an indictment was found was not a citizen of the Unite,d States, the court erred in refusing to quash the indictment on that ground, and also erred in afterwards overruling a plea in abatement for the same cause.

APPEAL from, tbe Circuit Court for *Winnebago*County.

*Whittemore & Weisbrod,*for defendant.

*The Attorney*General, for the state.

*By the*Court,

DIXON, C. J.

This case comes up upon exceptions alleged by the defendant pursuant to section seven of chapter 180 of the Eevised Statutes. One of the grand jurors by whom the indictment was preferred, was not a citizen of the United States. He was an alien born, who had declared his intentions to become a citizen, in accordance with the laws of congress, and assumed the privileges of citizenship of this state, but had not yet become a citizen of the United States. The defendant first moved to quash the indictment for this among other reasons. The motion was overruled upon this point, and one count of the indictment sustained, upon which the defendant was subsequently cpnvicted. To the decision overruling the motion exception was duly taken. After the motion was overruled, the defendant plead the same fact in abatement. The district attorney demurred to the plea, and the demurrer was sustained. To this the defendant also excepted. The objection is therefore saved in two forms, either of which is doubtless sufficient. *Byrne vs. The State,*12 Wis., 523-4, and cases cited; *Newman vs. The*State, 14 Wis., 393. As we think this objection fatal to the indictment, we pass by the numerous other objections urged by counsel. It was the opinion of this court, clearly indicated in *Schumaker vs. The*State, 5 Wis., 324, that persons not citizens' of the United States are disqualified to serve as jurors. Indeed the phrase-*675ologj of the statute is such thg,t we clo not conceive the question at all doubtful. “ All persons who are citizens of the United States, and qualified electors of this state, shall be liable to be drawn as jurors, except as hereinafter provided.” R. S., ch. 118, sec. 1. And the distinction between a citizen of the United States and a citizen of this state is clearly recognized in *Wehlitz’s Case,*16 Wis., 443, referred to by the attorney general. Eor some purposes the citizen or “qualified elector ” of this state is regarded as invested with all the privileges and corresponding burdens incident to citizenship of the United States, but for others he is not. The statute qualification for a juror is that he shall be a citizen of the United States as well as a citizen or “ qualified elector ” of this state. The indictment should therefore have been quashed, and the cause must be remanded with directions accordingly.
# C_2016067EN.01000601.xml

| 20.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 67/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 67/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

19 February 2016

(2016/C 67/02)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1096 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 125,40 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4625 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,77715 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3838 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1017 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,5358 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,023 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 309,11 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3777 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,4670 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,2903 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5605 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5274 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,6268 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6761 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5617 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 368,69 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 17,1380 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,2378 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,6180 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 988,04 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6836 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,843 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 85,1924 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,668 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,4854 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,2927 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 75,9715 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1096

JPY

Japanese yen

125,40

DKK

Danish krone

7,4625

GBP

Pound sterling

0,77715

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3838

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1017

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,5358

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,023

HUF

Hungarian forint

309,11

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3777

RON

Romanian leu

4,4670

TRY

Turkish lira

3,2903

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5605

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5274

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,6268

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6761

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5617

KRW

South Korean won

1 368,69

ZAR

South African rand

17,1380

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,2378

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,6180

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 988,04

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6836

PHP

Philippine peso

52,843

RUB

Russian rouble

85,1924

THB

Thai baht

39,668

BRL

Brazilian real

4,4854

MXN

Mexican peso

20,2927

INR

Indian rupee

75,9715

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.4


November 21, 1996


Mr. John Pence
President
Ontrack Data International, Inc.
6321 Bury Drive, Suite 15-21
Eden Prairie, MN 55346

Re: Software License Agreement for Seagate Technology dated June 25, 1996

Dear Mr. Pence:

Pursuant to Section 1 of the above-referenced Agreement, this is to notify
ONTRACK that Seagate is hereby exercising its right to extend for an additional
six (6) month period its exclusive licensing rights for the PRODUCT as defined
in the Agreement.  Seagate understands that its right to exercise is subject to
the conditions specified in the Agreement.

Sincerely,


/s/ Thomas F. Mulvaney
     Sr. V.P. and General Counsel
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 2023

- 1299

_____________________________ C ARL I. L ITTLE , J R

. ,
Petitioner
,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Respondent

.

_____________________________

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel

— Original Jurisdiction

.

February 29, 2024

P ER C URIAM

. The Court denies the petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel on the merits.

B.L. T HOMAS , R OBERTS , and R OWE , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Carl I. Little, Jr., pro se
, Petitioner

. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Respondent

.