alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### William CASIANO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2343

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed December 29, 2017

Matthew R. McLain, of McLain Law, P.A., Longwood, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Andrea K. Totten, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Ap-pellee.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand the order denying Appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion because Appellant’s claim of misadvice by trial counsel and the resulting prejudice is not refuted by the record before us.

Appellant was charged with sexual battery with a' deadly weapon or physical force. The maximum penalty for this crime was life in prison with a twenty-five-year minimum mandatory, with the latter being imposed if the defendant used a deadly weapon. §§ 794.011(3), 775.082(3)(a)3., 794.0115(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2013). Appellant alleges that he was offered and rejected a favorable plea offer not knowing that he faced a minimum mandatory of twenty-five years in prison. Had he known about the minimum mandatory, Appellant alleges that he would have accepted the plea offer and that the trial court would have abided by the plea agreement.

*527To obtain relief on a claim that defense counsel misadvised the defendant in a way that caused the defendant to reject a plea offer, the defendant must establish that:

> (1) he or she would have accepted the offer had counsel advised the defendant correctly, (2) the prosecutor would not have withdrawn the offer, (3) the court would have accepted the offer, and (4) the conviction or sentence, or both, under the offer’s terms would have been less severe than under the judgment and sentence that in fact were imposed.

*Alcorn v. State,*121 So.3d 419, 422 (Fla. 2013). Here, Appellant’s allegations were facially sufficient. Defense counsel has a duty to advise a defendant about the possibility of the minimum mandatory sentence. The fact that Appellant did not receive the minimum mandatory sentence in this case because of an error in the verdict form does not negate his claim that he would have taken the plea if he had known he faced a minimum mandatory sentence.

On remand, the trial court shall either grant Appellant a hearing to see if he can prove the *Alcorn*factors or attach portions of the record that conclusively refute the allegations in the motion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

PALMER, TORPY and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 12.1  I, Gary Freeman, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Pediment Gold Corp.;  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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The company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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company 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 company, 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company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; and (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the company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 companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.   Date: December 29, 2010   /s/ Gary Freeman Gary Freeman, President/CEO/Director (Primary Executive Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 72 (Tuesday, April 15, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 18363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9672]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[NAFTA-01341 and TA-W-33,029]


Willamette Industries, Incorporated, Dallas, OR, Notice of 
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By letter of February 4, 1997, the Oregon AFL-CIO together with the 
Western Council of Industrial Workers Local #2714, United Brotherhood 
of Carpenters and Joiners of America, requested administrative 
reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for NAFTA-Transitional 
Adjustment Assistance applicable to workers of the subject firm. The 
denial notice was signed on January 21, 1997, and published in the 
Federal Register on February 13, 1997 (62 FR 6804).
    The petitioner presents evidence that the Department's survey of 
customers of Willamette Industries was incomplete.
    On March 17, 1997, the Department issued a Negative Determination 
Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance 
applicable to the workers of Willamette Industries, Incorporated, 
Plywood Division, Dallas, Oregon. The notice will soon be published in 
the Federal Register. The Department has determined that in this case, 
the evidence presented in the request for reconsideration of the NAFTA 
petition is also applicable to the TAA petition. Therefore, this notice 
has been expanded to include the TAA petition.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of 
Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of March 1997.
Russell T. Kile,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-9672 Filed 4-14-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 79 (Friday, April 24, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 20387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-10988]



[[Page 20387]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Availability for Non-Exclusive, Exclusive, or Partially Exclusive 
Licensing of U.S. Patent Applications Concerning CS6 Antigens Methods 
for Production of Antigens

AGENCY: U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with 37 CFR 404.6, announcement is made of the 
availability of U.S. Patent Number 5,698,416 (entitled ``Methods for 
Production of Antigens Under Control of Temperature-Regulated Promotors 
in Enteric Bacteria'' and issued December 16, 1997) and U.S. Patent 
Application SN 08/799,145 (entitled ``Transformed Bacterial Containing 
CS6 Antigens and Vaccines'' filed May 13, 1994) for licensing. These 
inventions have been assigned to the United States Government as 
represented by the Secretary of the Army.

ADDRESSES: Commander, U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, 
Attn: Staff Judge Advocate, Fort Detrick, Frederick, Maryland 21702-
5012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Charles Harris, Patent Attorney, 
(301) 619-2065 or telefax (301) 619-7714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The inventions are related to (1) a CS6 
antigen for use in vaccines to protect from pathological effects of 
entertoxigenic E. coli and (2) method(s) for the preparation of 
proteins, and in particular a method which has been found to be 
especially useful for the preparation of antigens in E. coli. The 
natural and recombinant constructs giving rise to the proteins contain 
temperature-regulated promotors. The methods of the invention are 
exemplified by the production of antigens classified as colonization 
factor antigens (CFA) which have use as vaccines and for giving rise to 
antibodies for laboratory testing of antigens.
Gregory D. Showalter,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-10988 Filed 4-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
#### E.C., a Child, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Case No. 5D17-3861

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed December 29, 2017

Robert Wesley, Public Defender, and Tyler Stiglich, Assistant Public Defender, Orlando, for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

E.C. petitions this Court for a writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to toll speedy trial, stay all proceedings, and appoint two experts to evaluate his compe*530tency pursuant to Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.095 and section 985.19(1), Florida Statutes (2016). We sua sponte treat this matter as a petition for certiora-ri, find the trial court’s order departs from the essential requirements of law, and grant the petition.

E.C.’s counsel filed five separate motions to determine competency. The trial court denied all five motions as “legally insufficient.” While several of the motions were legally insufficient, the final motion satisfied the requirements of rule 8.095(a)(1) and section 985.19, and should have been granted. Hence, we quash the order denying the fifth motion to determine competency. On remand, the trial court shall stay the proceedings and order an examination in compliance with rule 8.095 and section 985.19.

PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED.

PALMER, ORFINGER and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 24, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-20783

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RICARDO SANCHEZ-CORTEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CR-856-ALL

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

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ricardo Sanchez-Cortez (Sanchez) appeals his conviction and

sentence for illegal reentry after deportation, in violation of

8 U.S.C. § 1326. Sanchez contends that the district court should

have suppressed the evidence of his prior administrative

deportation because he was deprived of due process during his

administrative deportation proceeding. However, Sanchez concedes

that he raises the issue only to preserve it for Supreme Court
No. 02-20783

-2-

review, as his argument is foreclosed by United States v.

Benitez-Villafuerte, 186 F.3d 651, 656-60 (5th Cir. 1999).

Sanchez also contends that, in light of Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is

unconstitutional because it does not require a prior felony

conviction to be proved as an element of the offense. Sanchez

acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but seeks to preserve the

issue for Supreme Court review in light of Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. Apprendi, 530

U.S. at 489-90, 496; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

“unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it.” Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). 

AFFIRMED.
PHANTOM 3

STANDARDSPECS • Home

• Products

• Phantom 3 Standard

• Specs

AIRCRAFT

Weight (including battery) 1216 g

Max Ascent Speed 5 m/s

Max Descent Speed 3 m/s

Max Speed 16 m/s (ATTI mode, no wind)

Max Service Ceiling Above Sea Level 6000 m (Software altitude limit: 120 m above takeoff point)

Max Flight Time Approximately 25 minutes

Operating Temperature 0°C to 40°C

Navigation system Built-in GPS

CAMERA

Sensor 1/2.3” Effective pixels:12 M

Lens FOV (Field Of View) 94° 20 mm (35 mm format equivalent) f/2.8

ISO Range 100-3200 (video) 100-1600 (photo)

Electronic Shutter Speed 8s -1/8000s

Image Max Size 4000 x 3000

Still Photography Modes • Single Shot

• Burst Shooting: 3/5/7 frames

• Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB): 3/5

• Bracketed Frames at 0.7EV Bias
• Time-lapse

Video Recording Modes • 2.7K: 2704 x1520p 24/25/30 (29.97)

• FHD: 1920x1080p 24/25/30

• HD: 1280x720p 24/25/30/48/50/60

Max.Video Bitrate 40 Mbps

Supported File Formats • Micro SD Card: FAT32/exFAT

• Photo: JPEG, DNG

• Video: MP4, MOV (MPEG-4 AVC)

Supported SD Card Types Micro SD Card 8 GB included

Operating Temperature 0°C to 40°C

REMOTE CONTROLLER

Operating Frequency 5.725 GHz – 5.825 GHz, 922.7 MHz – 927.7 MHz (Japan)

Max Transmission Distance FCC: 1000 m; CE: 500 m (outdoors and unobstructed, aircraft's 

altitude at 400 feet (120 m))

Operating Temperature 0°C to 40°C

Battery 2600 mAh LiPo 18650

Transmitter Power (EIRP) • FCC: 19 dBm

• CE: 14 dBm

Working Voltage 600 mA @ 3.7V

Charging Port Micro USB

INTELLIGENT FLIGHT BATTERY ( PH3-4480 MAH-15.2 V )

Capacity 4480 mAh

Voltage 15.2 V

Battery Type LiPo 4S
Energy 68 Wh

Net Weight 365 g

Max Flight Time Approximately 25 minutes

Operating Temperature 0°C to 40°C

Max Charging Power 100 W

GIMBAL

Controllable Range Pitch -90° to +30°

Angular Vibration Range ±0.02°

WI-FI VIDEO LINK

Operating Frequency 2.400 GHz – 2.483 GHz

Max Transmission Distance FCC: 1000 m; CE: 500 m (outdoors and unobstructed, aircraft's 

altitude at 400 feet (120 m))

Transmitter Power (EIRP) FCC: 27 dBm; CE: 20 dBm

Power Spectral Density 5.69mW/MHz

CHARGER

Voltage 17.4 V

Rated Power 57 W

APP / LIVE VIEW

Mobile App DJI GO

EIRP 100mW

Live View Working Frequency 2.4GHz ISM

Live View Quality 720P @ 30fps (depending on conditions and mobile device)

Latency Low Latency Video (depending on conditions and mobile device)
Required Operating Systems • iOS 8.0 or later

• Android 4.1.2 or later

Recommended Devices • iOS: iPhone 5s, iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPad Air, iPad Air Wi-Fi + 

Cellular, iPad mini 2, iPad mini 2 Wi-Fi + Cellular, iPad Air 2, iPad 

Air 2 Wi-Fi + Cellular, iPad mini 3, and iPad mini 3 Wi-Fi + 

Cellular. This app is optimized for iPhone 5s, iPhone 6, and iPhone 

6 Plus.

• Android: Samsung tabs 705c, Samsung S6, Samsung S5, Samsung 

NOTE4, Samsung NOTE3, Google Nexus 9, Google Nexus 7 II, 

Ascend Mate7, Huawei P8 Max, Nubia Z7 mini, Sony Xperia Z3, 

MI 3, MI PAD, Smartisan T1.

*Support for additional Android devices available as testing and 

development continues.
|                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                       
|View History: Annual                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                 
|View History:                                                        
|                                                                     
|U.S. Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Propane Air  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                     
|                                                                     
|U.S. Natural Gas Supplemental Gas - Propane Air  (Million Cubic Feet)
|                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            | 20,467 | 14,785 | 13,555 | 8,034  | 4,118  | 4,127  | 3,627  | 3,061  | 5,241  | 6,890 
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 1,476  | 1,575  | 1,613  | 3,002  | 5,073  | 3,099  | 7,548  | 3,435  | 1,488  | 1,571 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3,244  | 1,044  | 933    | 3,526  | 2,066  | 1,687  | 673    | 1,169  | 670    | 838   
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 401    | 299    | 309    | 363    | 2,346  | 1,386  | 1,031  | 1,724  | 1,559  | 681   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 258    | 3,093  | 1,337  |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 82 (Wednesday, April 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23486-23487]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11290]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review

ACTION: Notice of Reporting Requirements Submitted for Review.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to submit proposed reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to 
publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public that the 
agency has made such a submission.

DATES: Comments should be submitted on or before May 29, 1998. If you 
intend to comment but cannot prepare comments promptly, please advise 
the

[[Page 23487]]

OMB Reviewer and the Agency Clearance Officer before the deadline.

COPIES: Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and 
other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the 
Agency Clearance Officer. Submit comments to the Agency Clearance 
Officer and the OMB Reviewer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Agency Clearance Officer: Jacqueline White, Small Business 
Administration, 409 3rd Street, S.W., 5th Floor, Washington, D.C. 
20416, Telephone: (202) 205-6629.
    OMB Reviewer: Victoria Wassmer, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive 
Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.
    Title: Grant/Cooperative Agreement Cost Sharing Proposal.
    Form No's: 1222 and 1224.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Description of Respondents: SBA Grant Applicants and Recipients.
    Annual Responses: 427.
    Annual Burden: 30,141.

    Dated: April 20, 1998.
Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. 98-11290 Filed 4-28-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P