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

No. 1D15-5286

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 29, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Richard M. Bracey, III, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Virginia Harris, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

*1183Orion Christopher Gardiner challenges his convictions and sentences for manslaughter with a firearm, attempted first-degree murder, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. All of the offenses arose from the same criminal episode. On count one, Gardiner was classified as both a habitual violent felony offender (HVFO) and a prison releasee reoffender and was sentenced to life imprisonment with concurrent mandatory minimum terms of fifteen years and thirty years. On count two, he was sentenced to fifteen years' imprisonment pursuant to a plea agreement. On count three, he was classified as a HVFO and was sentenced to thirty years' imprisonment with a three-year mandatory minimum for use for a firearm. The sentence on count two was ordered to run concurrently with count one. The sentence on count three was ordered to run consecutively to count one.

We affirm Gardiner's convictions without comment. However, we must reverse his sentences on counts one and three and remand with directions to run the sentences concurrently because Gardiner's HVFO sentences on those counts may not run consecutively. *See**Cotto v. State* , 139 So.3d 283, 286-87 (Fla. 2014) (reaffirming the proposition stated in *Hale v. State* , 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993) that once multiple sentences from a single criminal episode are enhanced pursuant to the habitual offender statute, the total penalty may not be further increased by consecutive sentencing absent specific legislative authorization); *Braswell v. State* , 171 So.3d 199, 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that a trial court is prohibited from imposing consecutive habitual offender sentences for offenses that arose during the same criminal episode); *Preston v. State* , 134 So.3d 992, 994 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (reversing the trial court's imposition of consecutive habitual offender sentences for offense that occurred during a single criminal episode). The HVFO sentences may not run consecutively because the HVFO designation increased the statutory maximum on counts one and three and both offenses occurred during a single criminal episode; thus, the trial court was not permitted to further increase the penalty for these offenses by running the sentences consecutively. *Cotto* , 139 So.3d at 286.

We, therefore, AFFIRM Gardiner's convictions and REVERSE and REMAND for resentencing as to his convictions.

Wetherell, Rowe, and Jay, JJ., concur.
Luz M. GALEANO, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-0191

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

AUGUST 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Peter H. MILLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-70

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 16, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Antonio SIMMONS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-6864

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 17, 2016

Decided: November 22, 2016

. Larry Antonio Simmons, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Nicholas Bianchi, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Larry Antonio Simmons seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 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 dis*818trict 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, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (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, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Simmons 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
#### Audrel Jack WATSON, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Director Virginia Dept. of Corrections; Warden Wright, Warden-Lawrenceville Corrections Center; Ms. Goode, Medical Administrator; Ms. Hightower, Director of Nursing; G. Bowles, Dr., Dentist; MS. Morelle, Dental Assistant; Unknown Nurse #1; Unknown Nurse #2, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-6524

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 31, 2016

Decided: November 21, 2016

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michael Gordon Matheson, Thompson McMullan PC, Richmond, Virginia, for Ap-pellee.

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

*801Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Audrel Jack Watson, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders dismissing several Defendants under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) (2012), denying reconsideration, and granting Defendant Bowles’ motion for summary judgment in Watson’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Watson v. Clarke, No. 1:14-cv-01315-GBL-MSN (E.D. Va. filed June 2, 2015, *&*entered June 3, 2015; July 1, 2015; Mar. 24, 2016). We deny Watson’s motion for transcripts at government expense. 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.

AFFIRMED
ex-10_5.htm


    TBS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED
& SUBSIDIARIES                EXHIBIT
10.5 

     

     

    


      


       

      [Letterhead
of Berenberg bank]

       

       

      TBS Shipping Services Inc.

      Mr.
Ferdinand V. Lepere

      612 East
Grassy Sprain Road

      Yonkers

      New York
10710

      USA

      Fax
No.:  +(914) 779-5230

       

       

      Grainger
Maritime Corp.

      c/o TBS
International Limited

      Mr.
William J. Carr

      Suite
306, Commerce Building

      One
Chancery Lane

      Hamilton
HM12

      Bermuda

      Fax
No.:  +(414) 295-4957

       

      March 10,
2009

       

       

      Loan
Agreement dated 19 June 2008 (the “Loan Agreement”)

      Here:
Waiver Request for the Asset Protection Clause

       

      Dear
Sirs,

       

      We hereby
give our consent to suspend the asset protection clause according to
para-graph 10.2(b) of the Loan Agreement through 31 December 2009
under the following conditions:

       

      
        	
                ·  

              	
                You
      will prepay an amount of USD 1,625,000.00 on 19 March 2009
      representing the instalment of USD  812,500.00, due on
      21 September 2009, and the instalment of USD 812,500.00, due on
      21 December 2009.  the next regular repayment instalment
      will become due on 22 March 2010 as per the attached repayment
      schedule.

              


      

       

      
        	
                ·  

              	
                All
      other banks granting loans to TBS International Group e.g. Bank of
      America, The Royal Bank of Scotland, DVB Bank, Credit Suisse and AIG
      Commercial Equipment Finance Borrowing have waived their financial
      covenants – including the asset protection clause – required in their
      respective loan documentation through 31 December
      2009.  Please confirm this in writing to
  us.

              


      

       

      For this
request we will debit your current account No. 0523281004 with an arrangement
fee of USD 9,750.00.

      Yours faithfully,

       

      Jeh.
Berenberg, Gossler & Co. KG

       

      /s/  Drae
Aschenbrenner

      Drae Aschenbrenner

       

      Accepted

       

      SIGNED
BY

       

      /s/  Ferdinand V.
Lepere                                                      

      for and
on behalf of

      Grainger
Maritime Corp.
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.1




Summary of Base Salaries
for
Executive Officers of Park National Corporation


On November 19, 2018, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Park National Corporation (“Park”) approved the base salaries for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2019, for each of the executive officers of Park:  (a) David L. Trautman, Chief Executive Officer and President of each of Park and The Park National Bank, a subsidiary of Park; (b) C. Daniel DeLawder, Chairman of the Board of Park and Chairman of the Board and full-time executive employee of The Park National Bank, a subsidiary of Park; and (c) Brady T. Burt, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of Park and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of The Park National Bank, a subsidiary of Park.  Those base salaries are:
*  David L. Trautman -- $785,000
*  C. Daniel DeLawder -- $575,000
*  Brady T. Burt -- $375,000
Airborne Surveying

A TTN: Andrzej Mrotek 2409 Townlake Circle #221 Austin

, TX 78741 T el. 941.735.4039 Email: AJ@airborne-surveying.com

February 8 th, 2016

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave S.E. Washington , D.C. 20590

Re: Request for Exemption under Section 333 of the F AA Reform and Remodernization Act of 2012 and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations from 14 C. F .R 21(h); 14 C.F.R. 43.7; 14 C. F .R. 43. 1 1; 14 C. F .R. 45. 1 1; 14 C. F .R . 45.21; 14 C. F .R. 45.23; 14 C.F.R. 45.25; 14 C.F.R. 45.27 ; 14 C.F.R. 45.29; 14 C.F.R. 47.3(b)(2); 14 C.F.R. 47.31(c); 14 C.F.R. 61.113; 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a); 14 C.F.R. 91.9(b)(2); 14 C.F.R. 91.9(c); 14 C.F.R. 91.103(b)(2); 14 C.F.R. 91.105 ; 14 C.F.R. 9 1.109; 14 C.F.R. 91.113(b); 14 C.F.R . 91.115; 14 C.F.R. 91.119(b)(c); 14 C.F.R. 91.121 ; 14 C.F.R. 91.151; 14 C.F.R . 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C. F .R. 215 ; 14 C. F .R. 91.403; 14 C. F .R. 91.405; 14 C. F .R. 91.407; 14 C. F .R.409; and 14 C. F .R. 91.417.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the Reform Act) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, Andrzej Mrotek on behalf of Airborne Surveying an operator of Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems ("sUAS") equipped to conduct precision surveying, precision agriculture data collection, precision inspections and aerial video and photography, hereby applies for an exemption from the listed Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs") to allow commercial operation of its sUASs, so long as such operations are conducted within and under the conditions outlined herein or as may be established by the FAA as required by Section 333. The intended use of the sUAS operations contemplated by this petition is in the public interest because it clearly satisfies the "Four D's" of exemplary uses of UAS: to replace work that is Dangerous, Difficult, Dull, or Dirty, and at the same time provides an equivalent or greater level of safety than approved manned aircraft operations.

If we can provide any additional information to assist your understanding or review of this document, please do not hesitate to contact us at:

941.735.4039 or via email at AJ@airborne-surveying.com

Sincerely,

Andrzej Mrotek Airborne Surveying
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000882973
<NAME> CHESTNUT PARTNERSHIP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,107,217
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  147,841
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,769,687
<PP&E>                                         350,541
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,632,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,126,409
<BONDS>                                     13,740,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,632,678
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,693,841
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,658,716
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (953,620)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                249,793
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   249,793
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
Miriam SOLER, Roberto Soler and Alberto Soler, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1762

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

AUGUST 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
The BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, etc., Appellant, v. Marlen Cantero MESA and Luis Mesa, Appellees.

No. 3D17-1026

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 29, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
British Dewan MOSS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1745

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

AUGUST 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,061
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             564
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   710
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                54,813
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        941
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           1,729
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             1,718
<LOANS>                                         35,535
<ALLOWANCE>                                        475
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 105,319
<DEPOSITS>                                      63,068
<SHORT-TERM>                                    17,244
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,218
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           706
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,744
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 105,319
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,499
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                   99
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   121
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 5,397
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,936
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 343
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,118
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      143
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,868
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,472,859
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   1,472,859
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   888,091
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.81
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.81
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   10.30
<LOANS-NON>                                          5
<LOANS-PAST>                                       607
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,380
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   335
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        5
<RECOVERIES>                                         1
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  475
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               434
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                             41
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit






EXHIBIT 10.8


Welltower Inc.


Non-Employee Director Compensation


Effective January 1, 2019


For each calendar year, each non-employee member of the Board of Directors of Welltower Inc. (the “Company”) will receive an annual retainer of $95,000, payable in equal quarterly installments. If there is a non-employee director serving as the Chairman of the Board, such individual will receive an additional retainer of $125,000. Each non-employee member of the Executive Committee will receive an additional retainer of $7,500. Additionally, the chairs of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee and the Investment Committee will receive additional retainers of $25,000, $20,000, $15,000 and $20,000, respectively. If the Board of Directors holds more than four meetings in a year, each non-employee member of the Board will receive $1,500 for each meeting attended in excess of four meetings. With respect to the Audit, Compensation, Executive, Nominating/Corporate Governance and Investment Committees, if any of these committees holds more than four meetings in a year, each non-employee member of these committees will receive $1,000 for each meeting attended in excess of four meetings.  
Each of the non-employee directors will receive, in each calendar year, a grant of deferred stock units with a value of $160,000, pursuant to the Company’s 2016 Long-Term Incentive Plan. The deferred stock units will be convertible into shares of common stock of the Company on the anniversary of the date of the grant. Recipients of the deferred stock units also will be entitled to dividend equivalent rights.
### HOUS E O F REPRESENTATIVE S

24 5 Eas t Ceda r Driv e Pikeville , Kentucky 4150 1 

### LESLI E A . COMB S 94t h LEGISLATIV E DISTRIC T STAT E CAPITO L A^4NE

X Roo m373 C Frankfort , Kentuck

y 4060 1 (502 ) 564-8100 . Ext . 66 9 1-800-372-718 1 E-mail : Ieslie.combs@lrc.ky.go v

Augus t 12 , 201 1 Ms . Aloh aLe

y Associat e Director , Smal

l Communit

y Progra m Offic e of Aviatio n Analysi s 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S E W86-31 0 Washington , D.C . 2059 0 RE : Cit y o f Pikevill e Smal l Community Ai r

Servic e Development

Gran t Proposa l Docke t DOT-OST-2011-011 9 

### iS^ : S o

Dea r Ms . Ley , I a mwritin g t

o suppor t the abov e reference d Smal l Communit

y Ai r Servic e Developmen

t gran t proposal , submitted b

y th e Cit y of Pikeville . The Pikeville-Pik

e Count y Regiona l Airpor t (PBX ) sit s a

t the cente r o f a1 3 count

y regio n o f 345,00 0 people i

n Easter n Kentucky , Wester

n Virgini aan

d Southwester

n Wes t Virgini aan

d i s mor e tha n 10 0 mile s fro mth e neares t

commercia

l airport . Th

e PB X Regio

n i s surrounded b

y one o f America' s mos t importan t energ y producin g region s an d i s rip e fo

r additiona l economic , industria

l an d busines s growth . Th e introductio n of

schedule d passenge

r airlin e servic e will assis t

i n creatin g thousand s o f

ne w jobs . Th e successfu

l awar d of aSmal l Communit

y Ai r Servic e Developmen

t gran t will significantl

y assis t th e Cit y of Pikevill e an

d it s partner s - the Pikeville-Pik e Count y Airpor t Boar d an d th e Southeaster

n Kentuck y Chambe r of Commerc e an

d it s consultan

t i n successfiill

y recruitin g aregiona

l airlin e whic

h wil l provid

e servic e t o amajo r connectin g hub . I a

mplease d t

o joi n m y colleague s fro

m throughou t the regio n i

n recommendin

g tha t th e Departmen

t provid e th e SCAS D gran

t t o the Cit y o f Pikeville . Ver y truly yours . 

# (^^y^^^^U ^ 4 . (V-- ^ Lesli e A . Comb s Stat e Representativ e LAC/lf r
Nylia CARROLL, a/k/a Nylia Marie Carroll, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-4515

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 4, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### Billy F. LARKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chris KELLY, Detective; Wrightsville Beach Police Department, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-6865

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 17, 2017

Decided: October 20, 2017

Billy F. Larkin, Appellant Pro Se.

Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Billy F. Larkin appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)® (2012). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Larkin v. Kelly,*No. 5:16-ct-03230-D, 699 Fed.Appx. 220, 2017 WL 5033695 (E.D.N.C. June 13, 2017). We deny Lar-kin’s motion to appoint counsel. 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.

*AFFIRMED*
Exhibit 32

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 this quarterly
report of Nanophase Technologies Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Jess A.
Jankowski, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Frank J. Cesario, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our
knowledge:

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.

Date: November 9, 2009



/s/ Jess A. JankowskiJess A. JankowskiChief Executive Officer/s/ Frank J. CesarioFrank J. CesarioChief Financial Officer