alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pamela WESTBERRY, Petitioner, v. The STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 3D18-1469

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed July 27, 2018.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Jeffrey Paul DeSousa, Assistant Public Defender, for petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Sandra Lipman, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Before LAGOA, EMAS, and LOGUE, JJ.

LOGUE, J.

Pamela Westberry petitions this court for a writ of habeas corpus to quash an alias capias, or bench warrant, issued for her arrest. Based on well-established precedent and the State's commendable confession of error, we grant the petition.

*1309Westberry was arrested for possession of narcotics. Through counsel she filed a written waiver of her right to be present at pretrial conferences as authorized by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3). After the information was filed, she entered a plea of not guilty through counsel, which was accepted by the court. Later, when Westberry was not present at a hearing which the trial court had set to review plea negotiations, the trial court over objection issued an alias capias, concluding that Westberry was "noticed to appear" and that "no good cause has been provided for her failure to appear." Westberry then petitioned this court for a writ of habeas corpus.

The trial court erred because Westberry had properly waived her presence in court under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(3). While, "if there is good reason to do so, a trial court may require the presence of the defendant in court even when the defendant has filed a written waiver," the trial court must clearly advise defense counsel and the defendant that the defendant's personal presence is required. *Charlemagne v. Guevara*, 183 So.3d 1261, 1263 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (citing *Cruz v. State*, 822 So.2d 595, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) ). Here, the record does not indicate that the trial court clearly advised Westberry that her presence was required. The State has so conceded.

Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of habeas corpus and quash the alias capias. This decision shall take effect immediately, notwithstanding the filing of any post-opinion motions.
Vernon BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D16-4426

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 24, 2018

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Kathryn Rollison Radtke, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Nora Hutchinson Hall, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

COHEN, C.J., SAWAYA and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 21.1



SUBSIDIARIES





|COUNTRY OR REGION |  | OFFICIAL NAME                           
|----------------- |  | ----------------------------------------
|                  |  |                                         
|Argentina         |  | Ariba Argentina                         
|Australia         |  | Ariba Australia Pty Ltd                 
|Brazil            |  | Ariba Brazil Limitada                   
|Canada            |  | Ariba Canada, Inc.                      
|Cayman Islands    |  | Ariba Holdings, Inc.                    
|Delaware          |  | Ariba Latin America, Inc.               
|France            |  | Ariba France Sarl                       
|Germany           |  | Ariba Deutschland GmbH                  
|Hong Kong         |  | Ariba (China) Limited                   
|India             |  | Ariba Technologies India Private Limited
|Ireland           |  | Ariba Technologies Ireland Limited      
|Italy             |  | Ariba Italia S.r.l.                     
|Japan             |  | Nihon Ariba, K.K.                       
|Korea             |  | Ariba Korea, Ltd.                       
|Netherlands       |  | Ariba Technologies Netherlands B.V.     
|New Zealand       |  | Ariba New Zealand                       
|Singapore         |  | Ariba Singapore Ltd.                    
|Spain             |  | Ariba Iberia, S.L.                      
|Sweden            |  | Ariba Sweden AB                         
|Switzerland       |  | Ariba Switzerland GmbH/Sarl/Ltd liab Co.
|United Kingdom    |  | Ariba U.K. Limited
# Journal officiel C 182A/14 j

| | ISSN 1977-0936 |
| --- | --- |
| Journal officiel
  de l'Union européenne | C 182A |
| | |
| Édition de langue française | Communications et informations | 57e année14 juin 2014 |

ISSN 1977-0936

Journal officiel

de l'Union européenne

C 182A

Édition de langue française

Communications et informations

57e année14 juin 2014

---

| Numéro d'information | Sommaire | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Avis |
| | PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES |
| | Office européen de sélection du personnel (EPSO) |
| 2014/C 182A/01 | Avis d’annulation | 1 |

Numéro d'information

Sommaire

page

V   Avis

PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES

Office européen de sélection du personnel (EPSO)

2014/C 182A/01

Avis d’annulation

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2014/C 182A/02 | Historique des Journaux officiels, série A Concours | 2 |

2014/C 182A/02

Historique des Journaux officiels, série A Concours

2

| FR | |
| --- | --- |

FR

---

V Avis

PROCÉDURES ADMINISTRATIVES

Office européen de sélection du personnel (EPSO)

| 14.6.2014 | FR | Journal officiel de l'Union européenne | CA 182/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2014

FR

Journal officiel de l'Union européenne

CA 182/1

---

AVIS D’ANNULATION

2014/C 182 A/01

Les concours généraux:

| — | EPSO/AST/127/13 — correcteurs d’épreuves (AST 3) de langue grecque (EL)

  et |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AST/127/13 — correcteurs d’épreuves (AST 3) de langue grecque (EL)

et

| — | EPSO/AST/128/13 — correcteurs d’épreuves (AST 3) de langue portugaise (PT), |
| --- | --- |

—

EPSO/AST/128/13 — correcteurs d’épreuves (AST 3) de langue portugaise (PT),

dont les avis ont été publiés au Journal officiel de l’Union européenne
   (1), sont annulés.

---

(1)  JO C 131 A du 8 mai 2013, p. 1.

---

14.6.2014

| 14.6.2014 | FR | Journal officiel de l'Union européenne | CA 182/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

FR

Journal officiel de l'Union européenne

CA 182/2

---

HISTORIQUE DES JOURNAUX OFFICIELS, SÉRIE A CONCOURS

2014/C 182 A/02

Vous trouverez ci-dessous la liste des JO C A publiés dans l'année en cours.

Sauf indication contraire, les Journaux officiels sont publiés dans toutes les versions linguistiques.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |
| 19 | |
| 21 | |
| 26 | |
| 27 | |
| 30 | (PL) |
| 35 | |
| 41 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 42 | |
| 43 | |
| 46 | |
| 47 | |
| 48 | |
| 55 | |
| 56 | |
| 60 | |
| 62 | |
| 65 | |
| 73 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 74 | |
| 81 | |
| 88 | |
| 92 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 97 | |
| 98 | |
| 99 | |
| 108 | |
| 109 | |
| 116 | |
| 119 | |
| 133 | |
| 134 | |
| 136 | |
| 137 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 140 | |
| 145 | |
| 152 | |
| 160 | |
| 163 | |
| 164 | |
| 176 | |
| 178 | |
| 180 | |
| 182 | |

5

6

11

19

21

26

27

30

(PL)

35

41

(DE/EN/FR)

42

43

46

47

48

55

56

60

62

65

73

(DE/EN/FR)

74

81

88

92

(DE/EN/FR)

97

98

99

108

109

116

119

133

134

136

137

(DE/EN/FR)

140

145

152

160

163

164

176

178

180

182

---
Keiron Keith JACKMAN, Appellant, v. GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 3D17-2069

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 23, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Fernando Arturo FLORES-FANG, also known as Arturo, also known as Primo, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-41688 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed October 24, 2017

' Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Fernando Arturo Flores-Fang, Pro Se

Before KING, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Fernando Arturo Flores-Fang has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Flores-Fang has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

**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.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00317-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.R., A CHILD §

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 231st District 

Court

of Tarrant County (231-555534-14)

January 17, 2019

Opinion by Justice Bassel

JUDGMENT

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

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Dabney Bassel

 Justice Dabney Bassel
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


To the Board of Directors of
W Holding Company, Inc.
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No.
333-60126 of W Holding Company, Inc. on Form S-8 of our reports dated February
22, 2002, appearing in and incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of W Holding Company, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2001.




DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Juan, Puerto Rico
March 28, 2002


Stamp No.1789526 affixed to original.
#### Wayne Christian HAWKES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marta D. VAN LOAN; United States of America, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 14-17300

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted January 18, 2017 *

Filed January 26, 2017

Wayne Christian Hawkes, Pro Se

Michael Thomas Pyle, Assistant U.Sj. Attorney, DOJ—Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Jose, CA, for Defendants-Appellees

Before: TROTT, TASHIMA, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Wayne Christian Hawkes appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging that a fellow employee of the United States Department of Agriculture slandered him. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and a denial of a challenge to certification. *McLachlan v. Bell,*261 F.3d 908, 910 (9th Cir. 2001). We affirm.

The district court properly denied Hawkes’s motion to strike the 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d) certification because Van Loan was acting within the scope of her employment at the time the alleged slander and libel claims arose. *See id.*at 912. Thus, the district court properly dismissed Hawkes’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2680(h).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hawkes’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint alleging a *Bivens*claim because the allegations in Hawkes’s proposed complaint failed to state any federal claim. *See Siegert v. Gilley,*500 U.S. 226, 234, 111 S.Ct. 1789, 114 L.Ed.2d 277 (1991) (explaining that whenever the alleged “damage flows from injury caused by the defendant to a plaintiffs reputation, it may be recoverable under state tort law but it is not recoverable in a *Bivens*action”); *see also Steckman v. Hart Brewing, Inc.,*143 F.3d 1293, 1298 (9th Cir. 1998) (leave to amend not required “where the amended complaint would also be subject to dismissal”); *Chodos v. West. Publ’g Co.,*292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir. 2002) (setting forth standard of review).

*792Hawkes’s request for judicial notice, filed on March 31, 2015, is denied.

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
S. T. Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0380

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 19, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Exhibit 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned officers of 1-800-FLOWERS.COM, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby
certifies, to the best of such officers’ knowledge, that:
 
 (1)  the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended June 27, 2010, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable,
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 the Company.
 
 
 Date: September 10,
2010                                                                     /s/ James F.
McCann
 James F. McCann
 Chief Executive Officer
and
 Chairman of the Board of
Directors
 
 
 Date: September 10,
2010                                                                                    /s/ William E.
Shea
 William E. Shea
 Senior Vice President of Finance
and
 Administration and Chief Financial
Officer
 
 
 These
certifications are furnished pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed
filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).  Such certifications will
not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in to any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent
that the Company specifically incorporates them by
reference.
EX PARTE D.L.G.

(In re: The matter of J.D., a minor child)

2160652

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

May 24, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 2377** 

In re: CARLOS ALEXANDER SANDERS , Petitioner
.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus (No. 5:12

- cr - 00158

- FL

- 1; 5:13

- cv - 00873

- FL)

Submitted : February 12, 2015 Decided: February 1 8 , 2015

Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion
.
Carlos Alexander Sanders, Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Carlos Alexander Sanders petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion . He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. We find th e present record does not reveal undue delay in the district court. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and deny the mandamus petition. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented i n the materials before th is court and argument would n ot aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
#### Eastern Savings Bank, FSB, Respondent, v Sara M. Stern et al., Defendants, and Israel Drillick, Appellant.

[770 NYS2d 641]

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendant Israel Drillick appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Nelson, J.), dated June 6, 2003, as, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination in an order dated March 13, 2003, denying that branch of his prior motion which was to vacate the plaintiff s jury demand.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

After the plaintiff commenced the instant mortgage foreclosure action, the defendant Israel Drillick asserted in his amended answer, inter alia, that the subject mortgage was void as against his earlier recorded deed for the purchase of a portion of the subject property pursuant to Real Eroperty Law § 291. Drillick then moved, inter alia, to vacate the plaintiffs jury demand. The Supreme Court denied that branch of Drillick’s motion which was to vacate the plaintiffs jury demand, finding that the plaintiff was entitled to a jury trial with respect to Drillick’s statutory defense. Drillick then moved for leave to reargue the denial of that branch of the motion which was to vacate the plaintiffs jury demand. The Supreme Court granted *549reargument, and upon reargument, adhered to its original determination.

Contrary to Drillick’s contention, the plaintiff was entitled to a jury trial since the dispute between Drillick and the plaintiff involved competing claims to real property *(see Cilwick v Camelo,*55 AD2d 782 [1976]) and Drillick’s affirmative defense asserting Real Property Law § 291 was not incidental to the mortgage foreclosure *(cf. R.C.P.S. Assoc. v Karam Devs.,*213 AD2d 612 [1995]; *April M’s Enters, v Scott,*178 AD2d 572 [1991]). Altman, J.P., Cozier, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

Case No. 6D23-974

Lower Tribunal No. CF20-005761-XX

_____________________________

ERNESTO PAGAN RODRIGUEZ,

Appellant, 

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County.

Olin W. Shinholser, Judge.

January 23, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

NARDELLA, WOZNIAK and WHITE, JJ., concur.

Howard L. “Rex” Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Jean-Jacques Darius, Special 

Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jonathan P. Hurley, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING 

AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         4915729
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1367312
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     513851
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               7313407
<PP&E>                                        12488181
<DEPRECIATION>                               (5096929)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                15771818
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2316217
<BONDS>                                        1889405
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         30698
<OTHER-SE>                                    11146690
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  15771818
<SALES>                                        3682818
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                          2906236
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   612443
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (141195)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  22944
<INCOME-TAX>                                     13204
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               9740
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      9740
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted 
from SEC Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>  0000883946                       
<NAME> NETWORK IMAGING CORPORATION                       
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               3,782
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       14,857
<ALLOWANCES>                                          (406)
<INVENTORY>                                          1,404
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    21,851
<PP&E>                                               9,282
<DEPRECIATION>                                      (7,185)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      31,480
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               15,605
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                6,357
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 3
<OTHER-SE>                                           2,006
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        31,480
<SALES>                                             28,396
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    28,396
<CGS>                                               18,421
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       18,421
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    19,034
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     163
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (9,222) 
<INCOME-TAX>                                           (87)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (9,135)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (12,745)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Juan Carlos ANDRADE-FIGUEROA, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-11350 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed May 30, 2017

James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Juan Carlos Andrade-Figueroa, Pro Se

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

*156PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Juan Carlos Andrade-Figueroa has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (6th Cir. 2011). Andrade-Figuer-oa has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents ho nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*6th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.