alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Sammy DUKE *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 79-149

587 S.W. 2d 571

Opinion delivered October 15, 1979

(Division II)

*James E. Davis,*for appellant.

*698
      *Steve Clark,*Atty. Gen., by: *Robert J. DeGostin, Jr.,*for appellee.

Conley Byrd, Justice.

Appellant Sammy Duke while on parole from two previous convictions for burglary and grand larceny was charged on February 12, 1979, with the offense of burglary of Union Supply Company, allegedly committed on or about February 9, 1979. Following plea negotiations during which appellant was told that habitual criminal charges would be filed against him if he did not enter a plea of guilty, the State, without further notice to appellant, amended the information on March 8, 1979, to allege that appellant had two or more previous felony convictions and therefore was a habitual offender pursuant to Ark. Stat. Ann. §41-1001 (Repl. 1977). Appellant’s actual knowledge of the amended information alleging the habitual criminal charge came after the jury was chosen on March 12, 1979. After a trial on that day appellant was found guilty and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment. For reversal appellant contends that the trial court erred in proceeding to trial on the amended information charging him as a habitual offender and that the enhanced portion of the imposed sentence is invalid because the proof at trial did not demonstrate that appellant was represented by counsel in the proceedings that were used to enhance the punishment.

We find no merit to either contention. Appellant, being on parole from the former convictions, and having been advised during plea negotiations that such charges would be filed, is not in a position to complain of prejudice or allege surprise. See *Finch*v. *State,*262 Ark. 313, 556 S.W.2d 434 (1977). Furthermore, the record shows that appellant upon being advised of the charges did not request a continuance. See also *Bordenkircher*v. *Hayes,*434 U.S. 357, 98 S.Ct. 663, 54 L.Ed.2d 604 (1978).

The suggestion now made, that the proof does not show that appellant was represented by counsel on the prior convictions, was not raised in the trial court. Consequently, we will not consider such an objection for the first time on appeal. In making this disposition, we point out that appellant does not contend that he was not represented by *699counsel on the prior convictions, but only states that the proof does not show that he was represented by counsel.

Affirmed.

We agree: Harris, C.J., Holt and Purtle, JJ.
WCMS

Last updated on Monday, September 09, 2013

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/ind-calculator.html

Climate Change

Household Carbon Footprint Calculator

You can use the following online calculator to get a rough “ballpark” estimate of your personal or family’s greenhouse gas emissions and explore the impact of taking various 

actions to reduce your emissions. The calculator is broken into three sections:

Section 1: Estimate your current total household emissions.

Section 2: Explore actions you can take to reduce your greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, and waste disposal costs.

Section 3: See how much you can save (in dollars and emissions) by taking the actions you chose in Section 2. 

To get the most accurate results, gather your recent electric, gas, and/or oil bills so you can use real numbers for your household’s 

energy consumption. Remember that your energy bills vary by season, so use an average of winter and summer values if you can.

1.

2. Allow yourself 10-15 minutes to enter the data.

After entering data, use the TAB key to continue moving through each section of the calculator. When you get to the end of a section, 

click “Next Section” to move on.

3.

Visit the What You Can Do section of the climate change website to learn about other actions you can take to reduce your 

greenhouse gas emissions.

4.

Calculator | Climate Change | US EPA Page 1 of 1

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/ind-calculator.html 6/3/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

United States of America

v. 2:18-cr-76

Judge Marbley

Ashley Irene Vandenburg 

ORDER

There being no objections, the court hereby adopts the Report

and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 21) that the

defendant’s guilty plea be accepted. The Court accepts the

defendant’s plea of guilty to Count 1 of the Information, and she

is hereby adjudged guilty on these counts. The Court will defer

the decision of whether to accept the plea agreement until the

sentencing hearing.

Date: May 23, 2018 s\Algenon L. Marbley 

 Algenon L. Marbley

 United States District Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              7
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                           1,000
       
<S>                                  <C>           
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                         JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-31-1995
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                   521,402
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                        0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                          0
<EQUITIES>                              21,024
<MORTGAGE>                                   0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                         552,714
<CASH>                                   5,115
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                       2,639
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                  18,797
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         773,348
<POLICY-LOSSES>                        367,438
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                    107,282
<POLICY-OTHER>                               0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                        0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                              0
<COMMON>                                   130
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                             229,603
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           773,348
<PREMIUMS>                             196,220
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                     30,035
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                          20
<OTHER-INCOME>                             130
<BENEFITS>                             119,256
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>             42,258
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                    20,717
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         43,280
<INCOME-TAX>                            12,069
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     31,211
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                            31,211
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                             1.08
<RESERVE-OPEN>                         263,202
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                    132,264
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                            0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                      13,052
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                        80,507
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                        294,393
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                  7,514
        



<PAGE>
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 4 - 0345 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 3 -NM - 230 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: 

### 20130008 **Next Step:** F RAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, list latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comm ents received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch Man ager**  **Date**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       1,399,122
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,103,526
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    902,157
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,829,701
<PP&E>                                         150,518
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,976,698
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,477,744
<BONDS>                                      4,636,601
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          2
<COMMON>                                         2,109
<OTHER-SE>                                 (4,139,758)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,976,698
<SALES>                                      3,074,113
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,764,774
<CGS>                                        1,473,934
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,881,642
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (1,866,921)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,457,723)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,458,723)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (362,706)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,821,429)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4540 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4540

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to extend the ban on 
election activity by foreign nationals to election activity by domestic 
       corporations which are subsidiaries of foreign principals.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 27, 2010

 Ms. DeLauro (for herself, Mr. Cohen, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Kagen, and Mrs. 
    Lowey) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to extend the ban on 
election activity by foreign nationals to election activity by domestic 
       corporations which are subsidiaries of foreign principals.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Prevent Foreign Influence in our 
Elections Act''.

SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF BAN ON CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES BY FOREIGN 
              NATIONALS TO DOMESTIC CORPORATIONS WHICH ARE SUBSIDIARIES 
              OF FOREIGN PRINCIPALS.

    Section 319(b) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
U.S.C. 441e(b)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1);
            (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (2) and 
        inserting ``; or''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) a corporation (other than a foreign principal 
        described in paragraph (1)) with respect to which the 
        percentage of outstanding shares controlled directly or 
        indirectly by foreign principals is equal to or greater than 50 
        percent.''.
                                 <all>
```
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 5D2023-2152

LT Case No. 2017-CA-000667-A

_____________________________

DON K. JURAVIN a/k/a DON ADI.

JURAVIN,

Appellant,

v.

DCS REAL ESTATE 

INVESTMENTS, LLC, the CLUB at

BELLA COLLINA, LLC, and 

RANDALL F. GREENE,

Appellees.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Lake County.

Dan R. Mosley, Judge.

Andrew A. Labbe. of Groelle & Salmon, P.A., Tampa, for 

Appellant.

James D. Ryan and Lauren J. Schindler, of Ryan Law Group, 

PLLC., North Palm Beach, for Appellees.

August 13, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, KILBANE, and PRATT, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
Exhibit 99





                          Independent Auditors' Report



The Board of Directors and Stockholders
National Bankshares, Inc.:

We  have  audited  the  accompanying  consolidated  balance  sheet  of  National
Bankshares,  Inc. and  subsidiaries  as of December  31,  1999,  and the related
consolidated   statements  of  income  and  comprehensive  income,   changes  in
stockholders'  equity,  and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 1999 and
1998. These  consolidated  financial  statements are the  responsibility  of the
Company's  management.  Our  responsibility  is to  express  an opinion on these
consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the  United  States of  America.  Those  standards  require  that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain  reasonable  assurance  about  whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a
test basis,  evidence  supporting  the amounts and  disclosures in the financial
statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant  estimates  made by  management,  as well as evaluating  the overall
financial  statement  presentation.   We  believe  that  our  audits  provide  a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated  financial statements referred to above present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of National Bankshares,
Inc.  and  subsidiaries  as of  December  31,  1999,  and the  results  of their
operations  and their cash flows for the years ended December 31, 1999 and 1998,
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America.

As discussed in note 1(T) to the consolidated financial statements,  the Company
adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial  Accounting  Standards No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative  Instruments and Hedging Activities,  as of October 1,
1998.

                                            KPMG LLP


Roanoke, Virginia
February 11, 2000