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### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OFA MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 02-4320



# 
M ARYC ASTO , Defendant-Appellant. 

# 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge.

(CR-94-107) Submitted: July 29, 2002 Decided: August 21, 2002 Before WILKINS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Ann L. Ballard, LAW OFFICES OF BALLARD-MCGINLEY, P.L.L.C., Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellant. Thomas E. Johnston, United States Attorney, Paul T. Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM: Mary Casto appeals the district court’s order revoking supervised release and imposing a sentence of five months imprisonment, five months in a halfway house, and two years of supervised release. Casto asserts that the district court erred in concluding that she lied to the court when she denied, at the revocation hearing, that she had possessed marijuana. The district court relied on a laboratory urine test in holding that Casto had possessed marijuana and that her denial was untruthful. Counsel for Casto asserts that Casto did not deny using marijuana, but denied buying the drug or keeping it in her home.
This court reviews for abuse of discretion the district court’s decision to revoke a defendant’s supervised release and impose a sentence following revocation. United States v. Davis , 53 F.3d 638, 642-43 (4th Cir. 1995). Casto does not assert that the sentence is not within the guideline range. This court does not review a sentence within the guideline range that was not imposed in violation of the law. United States v. Porter , 909 F.2d 789, 794 (4th Cir. 1990). Intentional use ofa controlled substance is sufficient to prove possession of that substance. United States v. Clark , 30 F.3d 23, 26 (4th Cir. 1994); United States v. Battle , 993 F.2d 49, 50 (4th Cir. 1993).
We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Casto’s supervised release and imposing a sentence at the top of the guideline range. Therefore, we affirm the revocation and sentence imposed. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED 2 U NITED S TATES v. C ASTO
Order entered April 23, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00060-CR

No. 05-15-00061-CR

No. 05-15-00062-CR

No. 05-15-00063-CR

MARK ANTHONY JOHNSON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. F-1359739-I, F-1359740-I, F-1359741-I, F-1359739-I

ORDER

The Court GRANTS appellant’s Aril 17, 2015 agreed motion to substitute appellate 

counsel. William T. Hughey and Pasquel Lee are substituted for Lawrence B. Mitchell as 

appellant’s counsel of record. 

We DIRECT the Clerk to send all correspondence to William T. Hughey and Pasquel 

Lee, 2201 Main Street, Suite 400-10, Dallas, Texas 75201; telephone: (903) 935-5550; facsimile: 

(866) 823-7185. 

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JESUS GAYL CASTRO-DELFIN,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10446

D.C. No. 4:13-cr-01038-JGZ-JR-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Jennifer G. Zipps, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 19, 2015

San Francisco, California

Before: NOONAN, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Jesus Gayl Castro-Delfin (“Castro”) appeals his conviction and sentence for

possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and importation of

methamphetamine. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 952, 960. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm.

FILED

DEC 17 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
1. Because Officer Lopez participated in the questioning of Castro, the

admission of Special Agent Monahan’s testimony about Officer Lopez’s

translations of Castro’s statements raises some hearsay concerns. However, any

error in admitting Special Agent Monahan’s testimony was harmless beyond a

reasonable doubt in light of the overwhelming evidence of Castro’s guilt. This

evidence included Castro’s statements to the Passport Control Unit, his recorded

telephone conversations from the detention center, and the sheer quantity of

methamphetamine he transported, with a total retail value of approximately $1

million. See United States v. Morales, 720 F.3d 1194, 1199 (9th Cir. 2013). 

2. The admission of Special Agent Monahan’s testimony about Officer

Lopez’s translations did not violate the Confrontation Clause because Officer

Lopez testified at trial and was available for cross-examination. See United States

v. Owens, 484 U.S. 554, 558 (1988).

3. The district court did not abuse its discretion in assessing a two-level

sentence enhancement for Castro’s use of a “special skill.” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.3. 

Castro’s experience driving large tractor-trailers and his use of this skill in

importing methamphetamine adequately support the district court’s sentence

enhancement. See United States v. Mendoza, 78 F.3d 460, 465 (9th Cir. 1996).

AFFIRMED. 

-2-
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.1

 
                            FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
                             AMENDED AND RESTATED
                    PAYMENTECH, INC. 1996 STOCK OPTION PLAN
                    ---------------------------------------
                                        

       WHEREAS, Paymentech, Inc. a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), has
heretofore maintained the Amended and Restated Paymentech, Inc. 1996 Stock
Option Plan (the "Plan") for the benefit of certain of its employees; and

       WHEREAS, the Company considers it advisable to amend the Plan to increase
the number of shares of Common Stock of the Company, par value $.01 per share,
subject to the Plan; and

       WHEREAS, based upon the approval of the stockholders of the Company at
the Annual Stockholders Meeting on December 3, 1997, the Board of Directors of
the Company, pursuant to Section 8 of the Plan, has the authority to amend the
Plan;

       NOW, THEREFORE, effective as of the December 3, 1997 (the "Effective
Date"), the Company hereby amends the Plan by deleting Section 3 of the Plan in
its entirety and inserting therefore the following:

       3.  Stock Reserved for the Plan.  The shares subject to the Plan shall
           ---------------------------                                       
consist of 6,500,000 shares of Common Stock, subject to adjustment pursuant to
Section 4(h) hereof, which may be either authorized but unissued shares or
previously issued shares reacquired and held by the Company.  If any outstanding
Option under the Plan for any reason expires or is cancelled or otherwise
terminated without having been exercised in full, the shares of Common Stock
allocable to the unexercised portion of such Option shall (unless the Plan shall
have been terminated) become available for subsequent grants of Options under
the Plan.

       IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has adopted this amendment as of the
Effective Date.

                                       PAYMENTECH, INC.



                                       /s/  Philip Taken
                                       --------------------------------
                                       Philip Taken
                                       Chief Administrative Officer
                                       General Counsel and Secretary
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jesus Eduardo PENA-LUCERO, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-41683 Conference Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed August 18, 2017

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

Jesus Eduardo Pena-Lucero, Pro Se

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jesus Eduardo Pena-Lucero *841has 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). Pena-Lucero 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 *841published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 13(a) OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of IRIDEX Corporation;
 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 officer(s) 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; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any changes in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of the annual report) 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 officer(s) 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; andb.
    
    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.
  By:
    /s/  BARRY G. CALDWELLName:
    Barry G. CaldwellTitle:
    President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7916

CHRISTOPHER COLYN GUTKNECHT,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District

Judge. (CA-02-554)

Submitted: March 6, 2003 Decided: March 14, 2003

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christopher Colyn Gutknecht, Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer Ransom

Franklin, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Colyn Gutknecht seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254 (2000). We have independently reviewed the record and

conclude that Gutknecht has not made a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 

U.S. , 2003 WL 431659, at *10 (U.S. Feb. 25, 2003) (No. 01-

7662). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2000). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 99.2
                                                                    ------------


                         WIRELESS XCESSORIES GROUP, INC.
                         -------------------------------


     Statement Under Oath of Principal Financial Officer regarding facts and
     Circumstances relating to exchange act filings.



               I, Ronald E. Badke, Chief Financial Officer, state and attest
               that:

               (1)  To the best of my knowledge and belief, based upon a review
                    of the covered reports of Wireless Xcessories Inc., and
                    except as corrected or supplemented in a subsequent covered
                    report.

                    o    No covered report contained any untrue statement of a
                         material fact as of the end of the period covered By
                         such report (or in the case of a report on Form 8K or
                         definitive proxy materials, as of the date on which It
                         was filed); and

                    o    No covered report omitted to state a material fact
                         necessary to make the statements in the covered report,
                         in light of the circumstances under which they were
                         made, not misleading as of the end of the period
                         covered by such report (or in the case of a report on
                         Form 8-K or definitive proxy materials, as of the date
                         on which it was filed).

               (2)  I have reviewed the contents of this statement with Wireless
                    Xcessories Group, Inc.'s Audit Committee.

               (3)  In this statement under oath, each of the following, if
                    filed on or before the date of this statement, is a "covered
                    Report."

                    o    The Form 10K filed by Wireless Xcessories Group, Inc.
                         covering the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001.

                    o    All reports on Form 10Q, all reports on Form 8K and all
                         definitive proxy materials of Wireless Xcessories
                         Group, Inc. filed with the Commission subsequent to the
                         filing of Form 10-K identified above; and

                    o    Any amendments to any of the foregoing.



/s/ Ronald E. Badke                         Subscribed and sworn to
-------------------
Ronald E. Badke                             before me this fourteenth day of
-------------------
August 14, 2002                             August, 2002
-------------------
c 

". 4 ,c?, ,..' ii . 

.:;, * .,( '. ,.l, . 

!T r >.- A." '. 

.<. ~_ 4 ---3.. 

,r v, 

t-0 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

, 

]ti AUSTIN 

*%ll*Lo c. M*NN 

A.fmm”L. 0.rdmI.L 

tlunorable L. &Uley Watt, Alember 

.Texos Yri8on &oourd 

Yrady vuilding 

Uaar ia. Wyatt I 

ting Committee ritb 

0 Lba Texam Prhon 

88 me if tba Legisto lnr~esti(6ate the 

0 lqipal right to 

who is nut a member 

or 'the Ls~l~latuW 

saws! rights anil priviPrioon Yoard ~antc to thafhbern 

slatfre eom&ittec referred to by you 16, 

eatigating 6iomwittee authorized by cmate riooulutim ho. 4 CP tbs 48th Le@alature at its remlar ~asaiur~ on January 13, lQ43, and rrppointrd February 

18 tli t.tiereafter . 

The 6omnlttea io cor;posed oi rite ~tcrrule~s of the 

&annQ?, appoltitod by Lht? Lieutsaoat (iorornor, ad its pouor8 am3 very WOad, and in navise lidt~!. tc the State pmii 

ti?nLitlry oystai. 
I80 

rha Comridttee 16 aathorieal *to l tr- at mch 

t&es and ylanee between this date abd the date at' 

cm aomening 0r tbn regular masrrion or the 49th begislaburb,ra may to eucb Uuwittee eeem neeeaear7 and proper; 8t-d the waa.$ttee rbnll aontinua &he Inquiries hsrctvforb begun by the GOw&tCee 8utlwWired wbrl appointed 

at a regular sewion ef UJ~ d7Cb tegi,fiaCurc relative 

tu-ëlar tw o I~a tivna6 ti the l dmlnutratlon o f a ll l talh 

1688 ii1-4 8zay ot use ruattsrs yrtalnlng to er dfeeting 

the rcvmumo 41 L&h rjtato ~wermmnt, and tbs expeadituro ef &ax613, fweo, und asssammnts, srml te inquire 

fat0 any vlher arloirs and actttititr of gwansental 

dsjiartuento and inetituthme of rhatevsr kind and cbaractar, aa a uub l ttvitier in any way rf'feat the Ilnmcial 

or obbsr welfare of Lhe bwamtient and the eitlaene of 

Texa6 .* 

The C;oxatdttee L8 alothtwI with tbs pw6r to tom918te rule61 ul prooixiure and evfdenae; to toeue precee~ 

for Y&tBOOOOO, and to cmqw31 tbelr ottaadums, and the 

pockattton et all books ati re~erd@ %a cosmeatlea thercwit&l to punlab di8cba2iWcs as for cantewtpt~ to Imp&et 

and wukQ eopiee of any baokn, raaorus or tilm crt the dapartddnt* nnd in6iitutionr; and all the powers neaocseary 

IO o r tWr Be l oooaplish the pnrpoma for nbicb it is appoiatod. 

The Gomnltt~~ is 08 Wi*Xly autborixsd te 

ad coLponmto ull aaoessary !ikve6tigators, auditors 

employ 

OXCWIGS, ut~enugrapherr , and any other neenesary oeplo&w, 

3nd 4.4 Ilpbia and keep is t-word VP it8 imectfgutiona. 

UN? GoY;llrLitee Is furtberkera nuLhorir:ed to call 

U96tI the rtwrney benerUl'u Ospertment, Auditing Departaunt, ;?a6 all athar dspurtmmtr for on6fotavac and aUr&oe. 

At PoLlovo, of aourse, that the Colrcniitt4w -7 

;cMu prcbrblp does wail itself W ib,l* esn&eee am3 aeo~atanca of yeracms not uambero sf tbr Caaw.ttteo or of 

ttm ;egi~lature. 
181 

rsoisitenoe of ot&ws aa above outlined is aot of itself 

a deiogatlen cfP nnr 6E bbe Goctdttee*e pevsrs. 1t is 

op@ciolly outhurired a6 an ai4 to the tAms:itten In tbcr 

G~XQ~S~SS Or i&b Own hWrU1 WUQrs. 

itj’ G& ooie Bpeer 

Assistant
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5804 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5804

 To amend section 412(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
 require the Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement to obtain 
the approval of the Governor of a State before placing or resettling a 
            refugee with the State, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 14, 2016

Mr. Culberson (for himself, Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. Brady of Texas, Mr. 
   Weber of Texas, Mr. Farenthold, and Mr. Sessions) introduced the 
  following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend section 412(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to 
 require the Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement to obtain 
the approval of the Governor of a State before placing or resettling a 
            refugee with the State, and for other purposes.

    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 ``No Resettlement Without Consent 
Act''.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS ON DOMESTIC RESETTLEMENT OF REFUGEES.

    Section 412(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1522(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(E) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including the 
preceding provisions of this paragraph, beginning on the date of the 
enactment of this subparagraph, the following limitations on programs 
for domestic resettlement of refugees under this chapter shall apply:
            ``(i) The Director shall not place or resettle a refugee 
        within a State without the approval of the Governor of the 
        State.
            ``(ii) Notwithstanding any approval granted under clause 
        (i), the Director shall not place or resettle a refugee in any 
        locality within a State if the locality has in effect a law, or 
        a policy with the effect of law, disapproving of refugee 
        resettlement in that locality.''.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                      51,277,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,173,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   216,000
<INVENTORY>                                    615,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            63,432,000
<PP&E>                                      11,383,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,818,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              95,344,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,220,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       192,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  79,158,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                95,344,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,962,000
<CGS>                                        1,522,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               18,507,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,040,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             489,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,461,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    92,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (2,553,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,553,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.15)



</TABLE>