alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

The Honorable Donald J. Stohr, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-3525

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Missouri.

*

Lance Cockrell, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 20, 2010

Filed: January 25, 2010

___________

Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lance Cockrell appeals from the judgment of the District Court1

 entered on a

jury verdict finding him guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute

cocaine and cocaine base. The court sentenced Cockrell to 120 months in prison and

five years of supervised release. On appeal, Cockrell’s counsel has filed a brief under

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), challenging the sufficiency of the evidence

to support the jury’s verdict. Following careful de novo review, we affirm. See

United States v. Williams, 534 F.3d 980, 985 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review).
-2-

The evidence at trial included the testimony of Drug Enforcement

Administration agents who conducted surveillance, monitored telephone

conversations, interpreted those conversations, and interviewed Cockrell after

executing a search warrant at his residence. The agent who conducted the interview

testified that Cockrell admitted that he permitted his residence to be used as a “stash

house” for the drugs and that Cockrell acknowledged brokering drug transactions for

others. We conclude that the evidence in this case was legally sufficient to support

the conviction. See id. (noting that to convict on charge of conspiracy, government

must prove, by direct or circumstantial evidence, existence of agreement to distribute

illegal drugs and that defendant knew of conspiracy and intentionally joined it);

United States v. Nunez, 257 F.3d 758, 763–64 (8th Cir. 2001) (affirming conviction

based on evidence that supported government’s theory that defendant’s role in drug

conspiracy included maintaining stash house and collecting proceeds from drug sales

carried out by coconspirator).

Having reviewed the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we have found no nonfrivolous issues. We affirm the judgment of the

District Court and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, provided that counsel inform

Cockrell about the procedures for filing pro se petitions for rehearing and for

certiorari. 

______________________________
Courtney HUNTER v. STATE

CR-15-0754

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 3, 2017 Reh. denied March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 882860
<NAME> PILGRIM AMERICA CAPITAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           3,564
<SECURITIES>                                    20,422
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,291
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                26,277
<PP&E>                                           1,925
<DEPRECIATION>                                     618
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  89,429
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           42,480
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            81
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,949
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    89,429
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,683
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,196
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 647
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,840
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,918
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,922
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,922
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.64


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1498 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1498

 To require that local educational agencies disclose negotiations with 
 teacher unions as a condition for eligibility to receive funds under 
   the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund of the 
  Education Stabilization Fund of the Coronavirus Response and Relief 
                 Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 2021

 Mr. Good of Virginia (for himself, Ms. Foxx, Mr. Budd, Mr. Cawthorn, 
Mr. Gohmert, Mrs. Harshbarger, Ms. Herrell, and Mr. Norman) introduced 
 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education 
                               and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require that local educational agencies disclose negotiations with 
 teacher unions as a condition for eligibility to receive funds under 
   the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund of the 
  Education Stabilization Fund of the Coronavirus Response and Relief 
                 Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021.

    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 ``Students Before Unions Act''.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS FOR RECEIPT OF FUNDS.

    Section 313(c) of division M of the Coronavirus Response and Relief 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (Public Law 116-260) is amended 
by inserting before the period the following: ``, except that a local 
educational agency may not receive a subgrant under this subsection 
unless any negotiations between the local educational agency and a 
labor organization with respect to the conditions for the provision of 
in-person instruction are documented in writing and made public''.
                                 <all>
```
(January 15, 2004)

#### In the Matter of Hector Chebere, Appellant, v Robert T. Johnson et al., Respondents.

[770 NYS2d 357]

*366Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered on or about August 26, 2002, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 for an order compelling respondents to disclose certain materials under article 6 of the Public Officers Law, also known as the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded for an in camera inspection of the requested documents to determine whether respondents assert applicable FOIL exemptions.

Petitioner, serving a lengthy incarceration upon conviction after trial, seeks respondent prosecutor’s interview notes containing a witness’s statements made prior to his testimony at the trial. After almost two years of delay, respondents finally declined to provide said documents, citing as grounds the FOIL statutory exemption for endangerment of life and safety (Public Officers Law § 87 [2] [f]) and the public interest privilege, which protects statements made by a witness to prosecutors *(Matter of Kassebaum v Morgenthau,*270 AD2d 71 [2000], *lv denied*95 NY2d 756 [2000]; *Sanchez v City of New York,*201 AD2d 325 [1994]).

Although petitioner has not shown “ ‘a compelling and particularized need for access’ ” *(Sanchez,*201 AD2d at 326, quoting *Matter of District Attorney of Suffolk County, 58*NY2d 436, 444 [1983]), he has shown that many of the documents sought had been provided to his trial counsel, who claims that he no longer possesses them *(see Kassebaum,*270 AD2d 71 [2000]; *Matter of Huston v Turkel,*236 AD2d 283 [1997], *lv denied*90 NY2d 809 [1997]). Moreover, respondent has failed to show how providing the documents to petitioner would additionally endanger the witness, whose identity was known at all times by petitioner and his codefendants, who are also serving lengthy sentences. Given these circumstances, this matter should be remanded for an in camera inspection of the documents and a determination as to whether respondents properly denied petitioner’s request *(see Matter of Johnson v New York City Police Dept.,*257 AD 2d 343, 349 [1999], *lv dismissed*94 NY2d 791 [1999]; *Matter of Fink v Lefkowitz,*47 NY2d 567, 571 [1979]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.
<PAGE>
Exhibit 23.2

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULE

The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Engage, Inc.:

Under the date of October 1, 2002, except for Note 20 (b) and (c), which is as
of October 31, 2002, we reported on the consolidated balance sheets of Engage,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of July 31, 2001 and 2002, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in stockholders' equity (deficit), and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended July 31, 2002, which
are included in the Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2002. In connection
with our audits of the aforementioned consolidated financial statements, we also
audited the related consolidated financial statement schedule of Valuation and
Qualifying Accounts in the Form 10-K. This financial statement schedule is the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on this financial statement schedule based on our audits. In our
opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the
basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in
all material respects, the information set forth therein.

Boston, Massachusetts
October 1, 2002
#### Artie G. BURNETT *v.*ST. MARY’S HOSPITAL and ARGONAUT INSURANCE Company

73-209

505 S.W. 2d 24

Opinion delivered February 4, 1974

*Bullock ir Shermer,*for appellant.

*Smith, Williams, Friday, Eldredge & Clark,*by: *Michael G. Thompson,*for appellees.

Conley Byrd, Justice.

Appellant Artie G. Burnett filed a claim for workmen’s compensation claiming that she was twice injured in the employment of appellee St. Mary’s Hospital in October-November 1970. The October injury was alleged to be a fall down a stairway and the November injury was alleged to have occurred while lifting a bed rail. Before commencement of the hearing before the referee she amended her claim to state that the fall occurred during November and that the bed rail incident occurred in March 1971. The hospital admitted that claimant fell on the stairs in November but denied that her present condition was a result of the fall.

Appellant testified as to the fall and the bed rail incident and stated that her present complaints were a result of those incidents. She stated that she worked *1024regularly from the time she began work in August of 1970 until the date of her fall. She also stated that she previously worked for Russellville Nursing Home and had a good record there. She denied that she had been involved in an automobile accident or that she had hurt her back off the job.

Proof on the part of the treating doctors showed that she had injured her back in her yard while bending over to pick up an egg and that subsequent to the date of the claimed injuries she had been involved in an automobile collision. None of the treating physicians could relate her back problems to her alleged work injuries.

The records from the Hospital and the Hursing Home demonstrated an erratic work history allegedly due to headaches.

The Commission in denying the claim laid much stress upon appellant’s credibility. The circuit- court affirmed the Commission. We find evidence in the record upon which the Commission could have either approved or denied the claim depending upon the credibility of the witnesses. This being true we are unable to say that there was no substantial evidence to support the Commission’s findings. See *May*v. *Crompton-Arkansas Mills, Inc.,*253 Ark. 1080, 490 S.W. 2d 794 (1973).

Affirmed.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00301

- CR

Stevi Rene Hampton

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From the 371st District Court

o f Tarrant County (1353649W )

September 4, 2014

P er C uriam

(nfp)



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

the appeal should be dismissed. It is order ed that the appeal is dismissed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
John Carlton CHERRY, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4855

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Climate change is at the heart of the news. We are all concerned without exception. It marks our 

lives every day. It has devastating effects on our economies. Also, the price is too high, both in 

terms of money and lives. We must, therefore, accelerate action. That’s what inspired the United 

Nations 2014 World Climate Summit, to be held September 23, 2014 in New York. It will bring 

together around this common cause leaders of states, organizations, and civil society to promote

a new collective dynamic: the fight against climate change. The situation is such that one must 

act for the current generation first, while thinking of future generations. This turning point will 

highlight the outstanding actions to be capitalized and duplicated in other places. 

Today we need a homeopathic evolution or revolution on this issue that every 

day affects more and more hungry people.

It takes a very significant example of a permanent member of the UN Security Council that can 

speak with one voice and that can be echoed around the world. This is the case of the Climate 

Action Plan of the President of the United States, Mr. Barack Obama, confirmed by the 

Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan. This is a revolutionary, bold step which 

should be marked as falling within the scope of the MAPEX (Management of projects of 

excellence). To compliment this excellent initiative, it is with great pleasure that we have 

prepared a video that shows that this is a project of excellence because, although it originated in 

the United States, it also concerns the whole planet:

« MAPEX, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN

CLEAN POWER PLAN»

We encourage you all to discover this project of excellence, to support, to become actors and 

especially to share it with your friends and acquaintances.
| 1.   | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:            |   | March 31, 2010           |
|------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|  Signature: |   |  /s/ Mitchell Cox        |
|  Title:     |   |  Chief Financial Officer |
## F I FTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 5D2 024

- 1590 LT Case No. 2010

- CF

- 8349

_____________________________ C HARLES E. B OWERS , Petition er,

v. S TATE OF F LORIDA , Respond ent.

_____________________________ Petition for Belated Appeal. A Case of Original Jurisdiction. Ryan Edward McFarland, of Kent & McFarland, Jacksonville, for Petitioner. Ashely Moody, Attorney General , Tallahassee, and Ryan Roy , Assistant Attor ney General, Tallahassee, for Res pondent. August 2 3, 2 024 P ER C URIAM
. The petit ion for belated appeal is granted. A copy of this opinion shall be filed with the trial court and be treated as the notice of appeal from the January 8, 2021 order denying defendant’s motion for postconviction relief rendered in Case No. 2010

- CF

- 8349 , in the Circuit Court in and for Duval County, Florida. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(6)(D).2 P ETITION G RANTED
. J AY , H ARRIS , and B OATWRIGHT , JJ., concur .

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

_____________________________
MT TRANSITION LP f/k/a Memorial Hospital of Tampa, LP d/b/a Memorial Hospital of Tampa, Iasis Healthcare Corporation; Iasis Healthcare, LLC, Petitioners, v. Deborah Kerr TAGLIARINI, as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Alex Tagliarini, deceased; Henry J. Weiss, M.D.; South Tampa Medical Group, P.A. ; and Gustavo Serrano, M.D., Respondents.

Case No. 2D17-3375

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK>     0001084263
<NAME>    HIGHWAY ONE-OWEB, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           25599
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 25599
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   25599
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             4556
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          2348
<OTHER-SE>                                       18695
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     25599
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 18757
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (18757)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (18757)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.01)


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

JEREMY WELLS, 

Defendant. 

Case No. 3:18-cr-092 

Judge Walter H. Rice 

FINAL ORDER OF FORFEITURE 

Upon the United States' Motion for Final Order of Forfeiture and the Court's review of the 

record, the Court HEREBY FINDS THAT: 

On January 10, 2020, the Court entered a Preliminary Order of Forfeiture, finding that all 

right, title, and interest in an Apple iPod, Model A1574, SN: CCQT64E8GGK6 (hereinafter the 

"subject property") had been forfeited to the United States pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1467(a)(3). 

The Court also found that the defendant had an interest in the subject property and directed 

the United States to seize the subject property and to give notice of its intent to forfeit the property. 

The United States gave electronic notice through the CM/ECF notification system of the 

Motion for Preliminary Order of Forfeiture to counsel for the defendant, and the defendant did not 

object to the forfeiture. 

On November 16, 2020, the Court held the defendant's sentencing hearing and announced 

the forfeiture of the subject property. The Amended Judgment establishes that the defendant shall 

forfeit the subject property to the United States. 

The United States published notice of this forfeiture action and of its intent to dispose of 

the subject property in accordance with the law on an official government internet site 

Case: 3:18-cr-00092-WHR Doc #: 63 Filed: 04/09/21 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 276
(www.forfeiture.gov) for at least 30 consecutive days, beginning on January 13, 2020. 

The United States sent direct written notice of the Preliminary Order of Forfeiture to all 

persons who reasonably appeared to be a potential claimant with standing to contest the forfeiture 

of the subject property in the ancillary proceeding, including Samantha Turner. 

No person or entity has filed a timely petition with the Court asserting any interest in the 

subject property or objecting to its proposed forfeiture. 

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 

1. All right, title, and interest in the subject property is condemned and forfeited to the 

United States under 18 U.S.C. § 1467(a)(3), and no right, title, or interest shall remain in any other 

person or entity. 

2. The United States shall dispose of the subject property in accordance with the law. 

3. The United States District Court shall retain jurisdiction in the case for the purpose 

of enforcing this Final Order of Forfeiture. 

SO ORDERED: 

Dated: '1 [~/-ll 

WALTER H. RICE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

2 

Case: 3:18-cr-00092-WHR Doc #: 63 Filed: 04/09/21 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 277