alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Aloniza J. WILLIAMS, a.k.a Cat, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 14-10569 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(March 28, 2017)

Linda Julin McNamara, Peter J. Sholl, Arthur Lee Bentley, III, Stacie B. Harris, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Megan Saillant, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Gainesville, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before MARCUS, JULIE CARNES and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

PER CURIAM:

After Aloniza Williams pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a ñrearm, the district court imposed an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Williams appeals the district court’s decision to classify and sentence him as an armed career criminal, contending that the district court erred in finding that three of his prior criminal convictions were violent felonies under ACCA. The district court predicated Williams’s ACCA enhancement on four convictions for burglary under Florida law.1 On appeal, we affirmed Williams’s sentence, concluding that Florida burglary qualified as an ACCA predicate under that statute’s so-called residual clause, *United States v. Williams,*603 Fed.Appx. 919 (11th Cir. 2015) (unpublished), which the Supreme Court subsequently held violated the Constitution’s guarantee of due process, *see Johnson v. United States,*— U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015). Williams petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari, and that Court granted his petition, vacated our opinion affirming his sentence, and remanded for further proceedings.

The government now concedes, and we •agree, that Williams’s ACCA-enhanced sentence must be vacated because Williams has no predicate convictions that support the enhancement. In *United States v. Esprit,*841 F.3d 1235, 1240-41 (11th Cir. 2016), decided after *Johnson,*this Court held that Florida burglary is not a violent felony under ACCA. Williams’s only potential predicate offenses were Florida burglary convictions. In light of *Esprit,*these convictions can no longer serve to enhance his sentence.

Accordingly, Williams’s ACCA sentence is vacated, and his case is remanded to the district court for resentencing without the ACCA enhancement.

VACATED AND REMANDED.

1

. Only three convictions are required to trigger the ACCA enhancement. *See*18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1).
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Annual Report of El Palenque Vivero, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Francisco Mendez, Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sect. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sect. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 23 day of December, 2008.  /s/ Francisco Mendez______________ Francisco Mendez Chief Executive and Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Euro Group of Companies, Inc. (formerly ICT  Technologies,  Inc.), a Delaware  corporation  (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the  undersigned, Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:





(1)  The Report of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act; and





(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations o f the Company.








/s/  Vasilios KoutsobinasVasilios KoutsobinasChief Executive Officer





May 23, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM UNAUDITED
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTH PERIOD
ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10-Q
FILING.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           7,028
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,087
<ALLOWANCES>                                    (1,791)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   333
<PP&E>                                           5,293
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (2,821)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  16,476
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,249
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            14
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,213
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    16,476
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,597
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,458
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   134
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (150)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,845)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,845)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,845)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.13)
        

</TABLE>
II

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 911

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise

trade of the United States for the vessel SEA MISTRESS.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 9 (legislative day, JUNE 5), 1995

Mr. ROBB introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To authorize the Secretary of Transportation to issue a

certificate of documentation with appropriate endorsement for employment in the coastwise trade of the

United States for the vessel SEA MISTRESS.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That notwithstanding section 27 of the Merchant Marine

4 Act, 1920 (46 App. U.S.C. 883), the Act of June 19, 1886

5 (46 App. U.S.C. 289), and section 12106 of title 46,

6 United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may

7 issue a certificate of documentation with appropriate en8 dorsement for employment in the coastwise trade of the
2

S 911 IS

1 United States for the vessel SEA MISTRESS (United

2 States official number 696806).

Æ
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pedro CAMACHO-CASTILLO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-6638

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 16, 2017

Decided: November 20, 2017

Pedro Camacho-Castillo, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Nicholas Bianchi, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

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

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM

Pedro Camacho-Castillo appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3682(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We affirm.

In this case the district court correctly found that Amendment 782 would not lower Camacho-Castillo’s Guidelines range because Camacho-Castillo’s Guidelines range was calculated using the 2014 Guidelines, which included the changes to the Drug Quantity Table made by Amendment 782. Moreover, the district court sentenced Camacho-Castillo pursuant to a Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, and the record makes clear that the sentence was not based on the Guidelines range. *See United States v. May,*855 F.3d 271, 276-77 (4th Cir. 2017), *cert. denied,*No. 17-142, — U.S. -, 138 S.Ct. 252, — L.Ed.2d -, 2017 WL 3219499 (U.S. Oct. 2, 2017). Accordingly, Camacho-Castillo is not eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782, and we affirm the district court’s denial of his § 3582(c)(2) motion. 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*
<PAGE>


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


I,  Victor  Salerno,  certify,  pursuant  to  18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report  on Form 10-QSB of American Wagering, Inc. for the quarterly period ended
July  31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the
financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  American  Wagering, Inc


                                       By:     /s/ Victor Salerno
                                               -------------------------------

                                       Name:   Victor Salerno

                                       Title:  Chief Executive Officer

                                       Date:   September 16, 2002



I, Timothy F. Lockinger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report  on Form 10-QSB of American Wagering, Inc. for the quarterly period ended
July  31, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the
financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  American  Wagering, Inc.


                                       By:     /s/ Timothy F. Lockinger
                                               -------------------------------

                                       Name:   Timothy F. Lockinger

                                       Title:  Chief Financial Officer

                                       Date:   September 16, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION OF REPUBLIC
BANCSHARES, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          64,021
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           5,274
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               110,482
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                38,674
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    363,633
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          40,538
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            40,159
<LOANS>                                      1,882,560
<ALLOWANCE>                                     30,470
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,626,458
<DEPOSITS>                                   2,334,661
<SHORT-TERM>                                    46,100
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             19,921
<LONG-TERM>                                     26,537
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,500
<COMMON>                                        21,112
<OTHER-SE>                                     147,877
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,626,458
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 41,331
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                8,256
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                49,587
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              24,867
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,915
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           23,672
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    4,400
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                (139)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 20,625
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,577
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,649
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .15
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.16
<LOANS-NON>                                     23,727
<LOANS-PAST>                                         4
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 2,272
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 26,352
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                28,177
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   (2,749)
<RECOVERIES>                                       647
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               30,470
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            30,470
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         30,470


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JORGE L. CORONA,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

ROBERT CRABTREE; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-15707

D.C. No. 1:13-cv-01581-LJO-MJS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 21, 2015** 

Before: CANBY, GOULD, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Jorge L. Corona, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate

indifference to his safety and serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th

FILED

JAN 30 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.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Cir. 2000) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d

1193, 1194 (9th Cir. 1998) (order) (dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)). We

affirm. 

The district court properly dismissed Corona’s action because Corona failed

to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his

safety at work or to his leg burns. See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 837

(1994) (a prison official is deliberately indifferent only if he or she “knows of and

disregards an excessive risk to inmate health or safety”); Gibson v. County of

Washoe, Nev., 290 F.3d 1175, 1188 (9th Cir. 2002) (“If a person should have been

aware of the risk, but was not, then the person has not violated the Eighth

Amendment, no matter how severe the risk.”); see also Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d

1051, 1058-60 (9th Cir. 2004) (a difference of opinion concerning the course of

medical treatment does not amount to deliberate indifference).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Corona’s first

amended complaint without leave to amend after providing Corona with one

opportunity to amend and concluding that further amendment would be futile. See

Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1130-31 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (setting forth

standard of review and explaining that leave to amend should be given unless

amendment would be futile); see also Chodos v. West Publ’g Co., 292 F.3d 992,

2 14-15707
1003 (9th Cir. 2002) (“[W]hen a district court has already granted a plaintiff leave

to amend, its discretion in deciding subsequent motions to amend is particularly

broad.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

3 14-15707
III

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. CON. RES. 40

To commemorate the sesquicentennial of Texas statehood.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 30, 1996

Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself and Mr. GRAMM) submitted the following

concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

To commemorate the sesquicentennial of Texas statehood.

Whereas 1995 marks 150 years since the United States of

America admitted Texas as the 28th State in the Union;

Whereas the sesquicentennial of Texas statehood is a truly

momentous occasion that allows all Texans to reflect on

their State’s proud heritage and bright future;

Whereas acting on the advice of President John Tyler, the

United States Congress adopted a joint resolution on

February 28, 1845, inviting the Republic of Texas to

enter the Union as a State with full retention of its public lands; today, a century and a half later, Texas enjoys

the distinction of being the only State admitted with such

extensive rights;

Whereas the citizens of the Republic of Texas were deeply

committed to the goals and ideals embodied in the United
2

SCON 40 ATS

States Constitution, and, on June 16, 1845, the Congress

of the Republic of Texas was convened by President

Anson Jones to consider the proposal of statehood;

Whereas Texas took advantage of the offer, choosing to unite

with a large and prosperous Nation that could more effectively defend the borders of Texas and expand its

flourishing trade with European countries; by October

1845, the Congress of the Republic of Texas had approved a State constitution, charting a bold new destiny

for the Lone Star State;

Whereas the proposed State constitution was sent to Washington, D.C., and on December 29, 1845, the United

States of America formally welcomed Texas as a new

State; the transfer of governmental authority, however,

was not complete until February 19, 1846, when Anson

Jones lowered the flag that had flown above the Capitol

for nearly 10 years and stepped down from his position

as president of the Republic of Texas; and

Whereas with the poignant retirement of the flag of the Republic, Texas emerged as a blazing Lone Star in America’s firmament, taking its place as the 28th State admitted into the Union: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the Congress—

3 (1) commemorate the sesquicentennial of Texas

4 statehood; and

5 (2) encourage all Texans to observe such day

6 with appropriate ceremonies and activities on this

7 historic occasion.
3

SCON 40 ATS

1 SEC. 2. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit

2 a copy of this resolution to the Texas Congressional Dele3 gation, to the Governor of Texas, to the National Archives,

4 and to the Texas Archives.

Æ
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**18 U.S.C. Section 1350CERTIFICATION**

 

Inconnection with this annual report on Form 10-K of 1st Pacific Bancorp (the “Company”) for the periodended December 31, 2008 (this “Report”), Ronald J. Carlson, President andChief Executive Officer of the Company and James H. Burgess, Executive VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certifypursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.             This Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.             The informationcontained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the registrant.

 
| Date: March 27,  2009 |   |                                                  |
|----------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |   |                                                  |
|                       | By:    | /s/ Ronald J.  Carlson                                |
|                       |   | Ronald J.  Carlson                                    |
|                       |   | President and  Chief Executive Officer                |
|                       |   |                                                  |
|                       | By:    | /s/ James H.  Burgess                                 |
|                       |   | James H. Burgess                                      |
|                       |   | Executive Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 27

Correcting the enrollment of H.R. 402.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 20 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 5), 1995

Mr. MURKOWSKI submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

considered and agreed to

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Correcting the enrollment of H.R. 402.

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That the Clerk of the House of Representa3 tives is directed to correct the enrollment of H.R. 402 as

4 follows:

5 Amend section 109 to read:

6 ‘‘SEC. 109. CONFIRMATION OF WOODY ISLAND AS ELIGI7 BLE NATIVE VILLAGE.

8 ‘‘The Native Village of Woody, Island located on

9 Woody Island, Alaska, in the Koniag Region, is hereby

10 confirmed as an eligible Alaska Native Village, pursuant

11 to section 11(b)(3) of the Alaska Native Claims Settle12 ment Act (‘‘ANCSA’’). It is further confirmed that
2

SCON 27 ATS

1 Leisnoi, Inc., is the Village Corporation, as that term is

2 defined in section 3(j) of ANCSA, for the village of Woody

3 Island. This section shall become effective on October 1,

4 1998, unless the United States judicial system determines

5 this village was fraudulently established under ANCSA

6 prior to October 1, 1998.’’.