alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Kevin TAYLOR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D16-4252

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed April 13, 2018 Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 21, 2018

Terrence E. Kehoe, of Law Office of Terrence E. Kehoe, Orlando, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marjorie Vincent-Tripp, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Taylor appeals his judgment and sentence for attempted human trafficking *1204for the purpose of exploiting a child through commercial sexual activity and unlawful use of a two-way communication device in furtherance of the commission of a felony. Taylor raises the following arguments: 1) the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for unlawful use of a two-way communication device in furtherance of a felony; 2) the trial court erred by limiting the cross-examination of a witness; 3) the State made improper comments during closing argument that warrant reversal and a new trial; 4) the trial court erred in imposing costs of investigation; and 5) the judgment failed to state that Taylor was tried by a jury.

We agree that the trial court erred in imposing costs of investigation, as the State did not request them. *See* *Foulkes v. State*, 221 So.3d 789, 790 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). We therefore remand for the trial court to strike these costs from the judgment, noting that the State should be given the opportunity to request the imposition of costs. *See* *McCarthy v. State*, 893 So.2d 689, 690 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).

We also remand for the trial court to correct the scrivener's error in the judgment, which failed to indicate that Taylor was tried by a jury and found guilty. *See* *Harvey v. State*, 146 So.3d 66, 66 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). In all other respects, we affirm without further discussion.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, REMANDED.

SAWAYA, BERGER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
STATE of Louisiana v. Greenville MAHOGANY

NO. 2017-K-1416

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 18, 2018

Denied.
Case: 1:18-cv-00412-MWM-KLL Doc #: 19 Filed: 01/24/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 292
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.2


CERTIFICATION

I, James W. Dorst, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of Aethlon Medical, Inc.;

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

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

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

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated 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 of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

         c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and;

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

         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely 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
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

Date: August 8, 2007
                                             /s/ James W. Dorst
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             James W. Dorst
                                             Chief Financial Officer and
                                             Chief Accounting Officer
*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.

 

1See Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413 (1923), and

District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462

(1983).

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 98-10389

Summary Calendar

_____________________

ANTHONY LIONEL GIBSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

BILL LONG, ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:97-CV-1384-H

_________________________________________________________________

September 14, 1998

Before JOLLY, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Anthony Lionel Gibson, Texas prisoner #695684, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint with

prejudice under 42 U.S.C. § 1915(e) as frivolous. We have reviewed

the record and Gibson’s brief, and find no reversible error.

Although couched in terms of civil rights violations, Gibson’s

claim arises from his state court habeas proceedings. Under the

Rooker-Feldman1 doctrine, he may not attempt to invalidate his
2

state court judgment in federal court. See Liedtke v. State Bar of

Texas, 18 F.3d 315, 317 (5th cir. 1994). Furthermore, Gibson’s

challenge to a specific state habeas proceeding fails to raise a

constitutional question cognizable in federal habeas corpus

proceedings. See Nichols v. Scott, 69 F.3d 1255, 1275 (5th Cir.

1995). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its

discretion by dismissing Gibson’s complaint as frivolous, and the

judgment is AFFIRMED. See Sojourner T v. Edwards, 974 F.2d 27, 30

(5th Cir. 1992) (court may affirm judgment on any basis supported

by the record).

A F F I R M E D.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

NICHOLAS AHRENS,
Plaintiff, Case No.: 3:18-cv-78
vs.
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, District Judge Walter H. Rice
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman
Defendant.

ORDER: (1) APPROVING THE PARTIES’ JOINT STIPULATION FOR AN AWARD
OF ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (“EAJA”)
(@OC. 17); AND (2) AWARDING PLAINTIFF $4,787.79 IN EAJA FEES

This Social Security disability benefits appeal is before the Court on the parties’ joint
stipulation in which they agree that Plaintiff should be awarded attorney’s fees under the Equal
Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2412, in the amount of $4,787.79. Doc. 17. Based
upon the parties’ stipulation in which they present no dispute that all requirements are met for the
reasonable award of EAJA fees, the Court: (1) APPROVES the parties’ joint stipulation (doc. 17);
and (2) GRANTS Plaintiff EAJA fees in the amount of $4,787.79. As no further matters remain
pending for review, this case remains TERMINATED upon the Court’s docket.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 1-31-(9 (Dudes

Walter H. Rice
United States District Judge
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1004 

To prohibit the sale of a firearm to, and the purchase of a firearm by, 

a person who is not covered by appropriate liability insurance coverage. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2021 

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York (for herself and Mr. CARSON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit the sale of a firearm to, and the purchase of 

a firearm by, a person who is not covered by appropriate 

liability insurance coverage. 

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 ‘‘Firearm Risk Protec5 tion Act of 2021’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1004 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITIONS ON SALE OF FIREARM TO, AND PUR2 CHASE OF FIREARM BY, A PERSON NOT COV3 ERED BY APPROPRIATE LIABILITY INSUR4 ANCE. 

5 (a) PROHIBITIONS.—Section 922 of title 18, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: 

8 ‘‘(aa)(1)(A)(i) It shall be unlawful for a person to 

9 purchase a firearm unless, at the time of the purchase, 

10 the purchaser presents to the seller proof that the pur11 chaser is covered by a qualified liability insurance policy. 

12 ‘‘(ii) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell a firearm 

13 unless, at the time of the sale, the seller verifies that the 

14 purchaser is covered by a qualified liability insurance pol15 icy. 

16 ‘‘(iii) It shall be unlawful for a person who owns a 

17 firearm purchased on or after the effective date of this 

18 subsection not to be covered by a qualified liability insur19 ance policy. 

20 ‘‘(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the pur21 chase or sale of a firearm for the use of the United States 

22 or any department or agency of the United States, or any 

23 State or any department, agency, or political subdivision 

24 of a State. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1004 IH

1 ‘‘(2) In paragraph (1), the term ‘qualified liability in2 surance policy’ means, with respect to the purchaser of 

3 a firearm, a policy that— 

4 ‘‘(A) provides liability insurance covering the 

5 purchaser specifically for losses resulting from use of 

6 the firearm while it is owned by the purchaser; and 

7 ‘‘(B) is issued by an insurer licensed or author8 ized to provide the coverage by the State insurance 

9 regulatory authority for the State in which the pur10 chaser resides.’’. 

11 (b) PENALTY.—Section 924 of such title is amended 

12 by adding at the end the following: 

13 ‘‘(q) Whoever violates section 922(aa) shall be fined 

14 not more than $10,000.’’. 

15 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

16 this section shall apply to conduct engaged in after the 

17 180-day period that begins with the date of the enactment 

18 of this Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Carmike Cinemas, Inc. (the
Corporation) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, the Senior Vice President  Finance, Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer of the Corporation, certifies 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
Corporation.

|                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/ Martin A. Durant                  |  | 
|                                      |  | 
|Martin A. Durant                      |  | 
|Senior Vice President  Finance,      |  | 
|Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |  | 
|March 25, 2003                        |  |
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 4 

ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER 

61 FORSYTH STREET 

ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-8960 

Mr. Mathew Capone 

Director, Environmental Compliance 

New Hope Power Company 

One North Clematis Street, Suite 200 

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 

MAR 1 T 2014 

Subject: New Hope Power Company Okeelanta Cogeneration Station Project, PSD-EPA-R4016 

Dear Mr. Capone: 

This letter is in response to your request for a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) air quality 

permit for New Hope Power Company Okeelanta Cogeneration Station, which was received by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency on February 6, 2013. The EPA reviewed the Project's application and 

other supporting information and declared the application complete on November 19,2013. The EPA 

provided a preliminary determination and draft permit for public comment on January 24, 2014. 

After consideration of the public comments and pertinent federal statutes and regulations, the EPA 

hereby issues permit, PSD-EPA-R4016, for the Project in accordance with the provisions of the Clean 

Air Act, Subchapter I, Part C, 42 U.S.C. § 7470, and the implementing PSD Air Quality Regulations at 

the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40, Section 52.21. 

Enclosed is a copy of the final permit and the EPA's final determination and response to comments for 

this action. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. James Purvis at 404-562-9139 or me at 

404-562-9185. 

Enclosures 

cc: JeffKoerner, FDEP 

Phil Cobb, Golder Associates, Inc 

Sincerely, 

Heather M. Ceron 

Chief 

Air Permits Section 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recyled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1095 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1095

                    One Hundred Seventeenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
          the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-two

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
101 South Willowbrook Avenue in Compton, California, as the ``PFC James 
                 Anderson, Jr., Post Office Building''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PFC JAMES ANDERSON, JR., POST OFFICE BUILDING.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 101 South Willowbrook Avenue in Compton, California, shall 
be known and designated as the ``PFC James Anderson, Jr., Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``PFC James 
Anderson, Jr., Post Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,337
<ALLOWANCES>                                       143
<INVENTORY>                                      9,372
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                18,834
<PP&E>                                          49,681
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,494
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  74,607
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,950
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            50
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,195
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    74,607
<SALES>                                         19,328
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,328
<CGS>                                           15,781
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,781
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,719
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 707
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    121
<INCOME-TAX>                                       107
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 14
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        14
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 21


  Subsidiaries of Raytech Corporation               Incorporated

  Allomatic Products Company                          Delaware
  609 E. Chaney Street
  Sullivan, IN 47882

  Raybestos Friction Products (Suzhou) Co., Ltd.      China
  Xiang Yang Road, Suzhou New District
  215011 Suzhou, China

  Raybestos Industrie-Produkte GmbH                 Germany
  Industriestrasse, 7
  D-54497 Morbach, Germany

  Raybestos Products Company                          Delaware
  1204 Darlington Avenue
  Crawfordsville, IN 47933

  Raybestos Reibtechnik GmbH                          Germany
  Quettingerstrasse, 220
  D-51381 Leverkusen 3, Germany

  Raybestos U.K. Ltd.                                 England
  16, Spindus Road
  Speke
  Liverpool L24 1YA, England

  Raybestos G.B.F. Ltd.                               England
  c/o Addleshaw Booth & Co.
  100 Barbirolli Square
  Manchester M2 3AB, England

  Raybestos Powertrain, LLC                           Indiana
  312 St. St. Clair Street
  Sullivan, IN 47882

  Raytech Automotive Components Company               Michigan
  44600 Merrill Road
  Sterling Heights, MI 48314
    
<PAGE>
                                                    Exhibit 21
                                                    (cont.)


  Subsidiaries of Raytech Corporation               Incorporated

  Raytech Composites Europe GmbH                      Germany
  Industriestrasse, 7
  D-54497 Morbach, Germany

  Raytech Composites, Inc.                          Delaware
  Suite 295, Four Corporate Drive
  Shelton, CT 06484

  Raytech Europe, Inc.                              Delaware
  Suite 295, Four Corporate Drive
  Shelton, CT 06484

  Raytech Powertrain, Inc.                          Delaware
  Suite 295, Four Corporate Drive
  Shelton, CT 06484

  Raytech Systems, Inc.                               Delaware
  312 S. St. Clair Street
  Sullivan, IN 47882

  RIH, LLC                                            Indiana
  Four Corporate Drive, Suite 295
  Shelton, CT 06484

  RIHL, LLC                                           Indiana
  Four Corporate Drive, Suite 295
  Shelton, CT 06484

  Raytech Innovative Solutions, LLC                   Indiana
  Four Corporate Drive, Suite 295
  Shelton, CT 06484
## Surfaces

**Scoping :**  **The technical requirements for surfaces below apply to circulation paths, lift platforms, ramps and bridgeplates, wheelchair and mobility aid seating spaces, and step treads.**  Technical requirements:
 Surfaces shall be firm, stable and slip resistant.  Openings in surfaces shall not allow the passage of a sphere more than 16 mm (5/8 inch) diameter. Elongated openings shall be placed so that the long dimension is perpendicular to dominant direction of travel. Lift platforms that are fold ed and stowed manually, and ramps and bridgeplates that are deployed manually shall be permitted to have a cut -out in the surface 38 mm (11⁄2 inches) maximum by 115 mm (41⁄2 inches) maximum for the operator to grasp the surface.

 Protrusions on surfaces shal l be permitted to be 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) high maximum.  Carpet or carpet tile shall be securely attached and shall have a firm cushion, pad, or backing or no cushion or pad. Carpet or carpet tile shall have a level loop, textured loop, level cut pile, or level cut/uncut pile texture. Pile height shall be 1⁄2 inch (13 mm) maximum. Exposed edges of carpet shall be fastened to floor surfaces and shall have trim on the entire length of the exposed edge.  Surface discontinuities o Changes in level of 1⁄4 inch (6.4 mm) h igh maximum shall be permitted to be vertical.o Changes in level between 1⁄4 inch (6.4 mm) high minimum and 1⁄2 inch (13 mm) high maximum shall be beveled with a slope not steeper than 1:2.

o Changes in level greater than 1⁄2 inch (13 mm) high shall be ramped, and shall with a slope 1:12 maximum.