alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1952 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 1997 / Notices

Dated: December 16, 1996.

Eugene A. Ludwig,

Comptroller of the Currency.

[FR Doc. 97–674 Filed 1–13–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4810–33–P

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF

PEACE

Announcement of the Spring

Unsolicited Grant Program

AGENCY: United States Institute of Peace.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Agency Announces a

Change in Deadline for the Spring

Unsolicited Grant Competition.

Previous Deadline: April 1

New Deadline: March 1

DATES: Application Material Available

Upon Request. Receipt Date for Return

of Applications: March 1, 1997.

Notification of Awards: June, 1997.

ADDRESSES: For Application Package:

United States Institute of Peace, Grant

Program, 1550 M Street, NW, Suite 700,

Washington, DC 20005–1708, (202) 429–

6063 (fax), (202) 457–1719 (TTY), Email:

grantlprogram@usip.org.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

The Grant Program, Phone (202)–429–

3842.

Dated: January 8, 1997.

Bernice J. Carney,

Director, Office of Administration.

[FR Doc. 97–822 Filed 1–13–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE BAC–3155–01–M
III 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 127 

Recognizing the members of the United States Army and the physicians 

of Maine Medical Center for the open-heart surgery they performed 

on a 6-year-old Iraqi girl. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 4, 2009 

Ms. SNOWE submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the members of the United States Army and 

the physicians of Maine Medical Center for the openheart surgery they performed on a 6-year-old Iraqi girl. 

Whereas 6-year-old Tiba and her mother, Sareea traveled 

from the countryside of Iraq to Maine so that Tiba could 

receive open-heart surgery; 

Whereas the bravery of a young child and the phenomenal 

service of the courageous soldiers in the United States 

Army are inspiring and place a human face and a human 

heart at the center of one of the most war-torn areas in 

the world; 

Whereas Kim Block of WGME channel 13 in Portland, 

Maine professionally produced and broadcast a heartwarming story on this case; 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 127 IS 

Whereas all of Maine feels a boundless sense of pride for the 

tremendous commitment and contribution of Dr. Reed 

Quinn who led the team of physicians at Maine Medical 

Center in the 8-hour open-heart surgery procedure that 

saved Tiba’s life; and 

Whereas such surgery was made possible by the compassion 

of the Maine Foundation for Cardiac Surgery, and was 

a mission fulfilled by a team of genuine heroes: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate recognizes the soldiers, 

2 doctors, nurses, and hospital staff at Maine Medical Cen3 ter for their compassionate service, and Tiba and Sareea 

4 for their remarkable courage. 

Æ 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          10,678
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,203
<ALLOWANCES>                                       300
<INVENTORY>                                        734
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,788
<PP&E>                                           2,307
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,451
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  16,878
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,218
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             3
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,657
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    16,878
<SALES>                                         16,890
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,890
<CGS>                                            9,299
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,299
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,780
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (189)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (33)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (156)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (156)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)


</TABLE>
Submitted November 15;

portion of judgment imposing $200 fine and $100 bench probation fee reversed, otherwise affirmed December 14, 2016

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Plaintiff-Respondent, v.*CYNTHIA ANN HURST, *Defendant-Appellant.*

Multnomah County Circuit Court

14CR16374; A159323

385 P3d 1285

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Laura E. Coffin, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Nani Apo, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Duncan, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and Garrett, Judge.

*916PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted after being found guilty of two counts of violating a stalking protective order, both misdemeanors. At sentencing, the court announced that it would impose 12 months of formal probation, including, as conditions, community service, no contact with the victim, and counseling as directed by her probation officer. In the written judgment, the court also imposed a $200 fine and a $100 fee for bench probation, even though the court had not announced those additional financial obligations in open court.

On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying her motion for a judgment of acquittal on one of the counts. We reject that argument without published discussion. In her remaining assignments of error, defendant argues that the trial court erred in imposing the $200 fine and the $100 fee without announcing them on the record, and, further, that the $100 fee for bench probation was erroneous because defendant was not, in fact, sentenced to bench probation. The state concedes that the trial court erred by imposing the fine and fee, and it urges us to reverse those parts of the judgment but otherwise affirm. *See State v. Johnson,*260 Or App 176, 177, 316 P3d 432 (2013) (accepting state’s concession that “the court erred in entering a judgment ordering defendant to pay $230 for his court-appointed attorney because it had not imposed that term orally and that the error should be corrected”); *cf.*ORS 137.540(7) (authorizing $100 fee when the court orders that “probation be *supervised by the court”*(emphasis added)). We agree with and accept the state’s concession of error on the fine and the fee, as well as the state’s proposed disposition. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment insofar as it imposes the $200 fine and $100 fee, and we otherwise affirm.

Portion of judgment imposing $200 fine and $100 bench probation fee reversed; otherwise affirmed.
# Table 1.2
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 22, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129300 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 129300 

 COA: 252906 

Ingham CC: 02-001189-FH

SUSAN BRUSH SWANSON,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 21, 2005 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

CAVANAGH and KELLY, JJ., would grant leave to appeal. 

p0315 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

March 22, 2006 

Clerk
# m94_11b
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         132,625
<SECURITIES>                                    26,408
<RECEIVABLES>                                   91,877
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               248,815
<PP&E>                                          86,491
<DEPRECIATION>                                  61,452
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 336,004
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          108,399
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           252
<OTHER-SE>                                     219,871
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   336,004
<SALES>                                        288,073
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               288,073
<CGS>                                          114,043
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  147,216
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (10,830)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 37,644
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,865
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             25,779
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    25,779
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .71
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .67
        

</TABLE>
#### JORDEN WILLIAMS *v.*COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTION

(AC 35113)

DiPentima, C. J., and Gruendel and Beach, Js.

Argued February 18—

officially released March 18, 2014

Petitioner’s appeal from the Superior Court in the judicial district of Tolland, *Newson, J.*

Per Curiam.

The appeal is dismissed.
S95A0845.

#### SMITH v. THE STATE.

(462 SE2d 369)

Sears, Justice.

Smith was convicted of felony murder and aggravated assault, *707and sentenced to life imprisonment.1 The evidence adduced at trial supported a finding that Smith strangled his neighbor and co-worker, Ellison Starling, after rendering him unconscious by hitting him over the head. Smith was initially arrested for a different murder, confessed to that particular murder during questioning, and signed a waiver of rights form. Immediately thereafter, Smith confessed to the murder of Starling. Smith contends that the admission into evidence of his signed waiver of rights form with regard to his first confession impermissibly placed his character in issue in the present matter by showing the commission of a different crime. We find that the waiver of rights form was properly admitted as evidence of both the volunta-riness of Smith’s confession to the instant murder and the circumstances of Smith’s arrest. See *Parker v. State,*255 Ga. 167, 168 (336 SE2d 242) (1985); *Bixby v. State,*234 Ga. 812, 814 (218 SE2d 609) (1975). Thus, its incidental showing of the commission of a different crime did not mandate its exclusion. *Bixby,*supra.2 After carefully reviewing the record, we find no error in Smith’s remaining enumerations.3

Decided October 2, 1995.

*Sarina J. Woods,*for appellant.

*Lewis R. Slaton, District Attorney, Penny A. Penn, Leonora Grant, Assistant District Attorneys, Michael J. Bowers, Attorney General,*for appellee.

Further, we find that the evidence was sufficient to allow a rational trier of fact to find Smith guilty of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. *Jackson v. Virginia,*443 U. S. 307 (99 SC 2781, 61 LE2d 560) (1979).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 The crime was committed on January 8, 1993. Smith was indicted on February 3, 1993, the trial began on September 21, 1993, and Smith was sentenced on September 24, 1993. Smith filed his motion for new trial on October 22, 1993. The transcript was certified by the court reporter on November 1, 1993, and the trial court denied the motion for new trial on January 12,1995. Smith timely filed his notice of appeal on February 1,1995. The appeal was docketed in this Court on February 28, 1995, and submitted for decision without oral argument on April 24, 1995.

2

 Notably, the word “murder” was redacted from the form before it was admitted.

3

 In his remaining enumerations of error, Smith contends that the trial court erred in (1) ruling that one of Smith’s peremptory strikes was racially motivated, (2) refusing to allow Smith to strike a juror for cause, (3) disallowing certain questions during voir dire of the jury panel, and (4) finding that his confession to the Starling murder was voluntary.
No. 11-11030.

#### Garza *v.*Kansas.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
KIMBRA WILLIAMS

, Appellant,

v.

JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA and SHERIFF OF JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA

, Appellee s

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 1693

_____________________________/

Opinion filed February 5, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Jackson County

. Shonna Y. Gay , Judge

. Kerry Adkison, Chipley , for Appellant.

Timothy M. Warner and W i lliam G. Warner, of Warner Law Firm, P.A., Panama City, and Keith C. Tischler of Jolly, Peterson & Truckenblood, P.A., Tallahassee

, for Appellee s

.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

THOMAS

, OSTERHAUS

, and KELSEY

, J J

. , CONCUR.
```
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 2 (Friday, January 3, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 401-402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. ER97-122-000]

United Power Technologies, Inc., Notice of Issuance of Order

December 27, 1996.
    United Power Technologies, Inc. (United Power) submitted for filing 
a rate schedule under which United Power will engage in wholesale 
electric power and energy transactions as a marketer. United Power also 
requested waiver of various Commission regulations. In particular, 
United Power requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 
18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability by United Power.
    On December 16, 1996, pursuant to delegated authority, the 
Director, Division of Applications, Office of Electric Power 
Regulation, granted requests for blanket approval under Part 34, 
subject to the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by United Power should file a motion to 
intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules 
211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 
385.211 and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, United Power is 
authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as 
a guarantor, endorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security 
of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for 
some lawful object within the corporate purposes of the

[[Page 402]]

applicant, and compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably 
necessary or appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of United Power's issuances of securities or 
assumptions of liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is January 15, 1997. Copies 
of the full test of the order are available from the Commission's 
Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-8 Filed 1-2-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
n VlSIOn PS LAS VEGAS | LOS ANGELES | DALLAS |

ENTERTAINMENT I CAPITAL

Mr. Bob Karns

Sovereign Air, Inc.

Dear Bob:

As per your request, I am providing this document as a background to the Nvision group of companies

so that you may have the information you require for your D.O.T. application. If you should require, we

could provide more detailed financial information although this is not public information and would

require a separate use and non-disclosure agreement.

Nvision Partners is a full service firm providing project consulting primarily to the entertainment and

entertainment support industries. We specialize in motion picture, stage and television planning and

production. Our services include capital structure, executive production services, per project consulting.

This includes both live and filmed entertainment. Currently, our entertainment practice has over $200

Million U.S. in projects and capital under management.

Nvision Partners, through its Dallas based subsidiary Nvision Sports Management d.b.a. NvisionGolf,

manages and produces two worldwide golf tournaments. Through NSM, we also provide representation

to multiple golf players and sports entertainment related talent. Through licensing and fees, we project

the sports division will create revenues of over $20 Million U.S. in 2010.

Most recently and more directly related to Sovereign Air, we created another subsidiary called Nvision

AviaTech. This Las Vegas based entity provides over 60 years of combined experience in the aviation

and international defense fields. We employ experts with diverse backgrounds in federal regulations,

operations, maintenance, defense, and aircraft acquisition and leasing. Nvision Partners has devoted $5

Million U.S. to this division and is currently placing capital in ventures including start-up air carrier, as

well as acquisition of existing businesses. We are also concentrating on opportunities in international

leasing of business aircraft. Nvision AviaTech is based in Tel Aviv, Israel.

In answer to some questions raised during our previous conversation, our planned investment in

Sovereign Air will be conducted through Nvision AviaTech. The placement will be for $350,000 U.S. with

an additional line of credit through Nvision AviaTech for $500,000 U.S. subject to the terms and

conditions in the funding document package which is forthcoming.

I hope this letter answered some of the questions raised. If you require further information for the

information you are preparing for the D.O.T., please let me know and I will do my best to provide that to

you. We look forward to a successful relationship with Sovereign Air.

Brian Hicks

Managing Director, Nvision Partners / Nvision AviaTech
**Exhibit23.2**

 

 

 

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

 

The Shareholders and Trustees

InnSuites Hospitality Trust:

 

We consent to the incorporation by referencein the registration statement (No. 333-46030) on Form S-8 of InnSuites HospitalityTrust and subsidiaries (the Company) of our report dated April 30, 2002, exceptas to note 21 which is as of May 2, 2005, with respect to the consolidatedstatements of operations, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the yearended January 31, 2002, and the 2002 information in the related financialstatement schedule, which report appears in the January 31, 2004, annual reporton Form 10-K/A of the Company.

 

As discussed in note 21 to the consolidatedfinancial statements, the Company has restated the consolidated statement ofoperations for the year ended January 31, 2002.

 
| Phoenix, Arizona | /s/ KPMG LLP |   |
|------------------|--------------|--------|
| May 2, 2005      |         |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 61 (Monday, March 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 15220]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-8078]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

March 20, 1997.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance Officer listed. Comments regarding this information 
collection should be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the 
Treasury Department Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 
2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

Departmental Offices/Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)

    OMB Number: 1506-0004.
    Form Number: IRS Form 4789.
    Type of Review: Extension.
    Title: Currency Transaction Report.
    Description: The Bank Secrecy Act and its implementing regulations 
require all financial institutions to make a report of transactions in 
currency in excess of $10,000. This form is the method by which such 
reports are made by all financial institutions, except casinos.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 180,000.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Response: 10 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 4,000,000 hours.

    Clearance Officer: Lois K. Holland (202) 622-1563, Departmental 
Offices, Room 2110, 1425 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20220.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.
Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-8078 Filed 3-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-25-P
No. 12-5239.

#### Dang *v.*Solar Turbines Inc.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
# 1999