alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kenneth Minor, Appellant.

[50 NYS3d 36]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura A. Ward, J.), rendered October 20, 2014, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Under the law of the case doctrine *(see Delgado v City of New York,*144 AD3d 46, 51 [1st Dept 2016]), this Court’s prior decision (111 AD3d 198 [1st Dept 2013]) bars defendant’s contentions that the court improperly denied his motion to compel the People to resubmit the entire case to a new grand jury, and permitted prosecutorial misconduct in the first grand jury proceeding. Moreover, there was no taint of prosecutorial misconduct in the original indictment charging intentional murder, in the second indictment charging second-degree *462manslaughter by assisting a suicide (Penal Law § 125.25 [1] [b]), or in the consolidation of the two indictments.

Unlike the situation in *People v Pelchat*(62 NY2d 97 [1984]), there was no “false” grand jury testimony. Upon reaching the conclusion that, notwithstanding circumstantial evidence of robbery presented in good faith to the first grand jury, defendant did not in fact rob the victim, the People abandoned the robbery theory and those counts of the original indictment based thereon, leaving in place the count of second-degree murder not based on robbery.

As explained in our prior opinion (111 AD3d at 203), the underlying evidence presented the alternative scenarios that defendant either committed intentional murder (at the request of the deceased, who wished to die), or second-degree manslaughter by assisting a suicide. After our reversal and remand based on an error in the court’s charge, the People acted within their discretion in obtaining a second indictment charging only assisted-suicide manslaughter, without re-presenting the murder charge, and the court properly consolidated the two indictments, which were “based upon the same act or upon the same criminal transaction” (CPL 200.20 [2] [a]; *see People v Franco,*86 NY2d 493, 500 [1995]). Furthermore, there was nothing legally defective about an indictment, consolidated or otherwise, containing these two types of homicide.

Contrary to defendant’s further contention, he was not entitled to plead guilty to only one of the two consolidated indictments *(see People v Cahill,*2 NY3d 14, 43-44 [2003]). The record clearly establishes that the indictments had already been consolidated before defendant purported to plead guilty to second-degree manslaughter.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Mazzarelli, Moskowitz and Kahn, JJ.
No. 10-5645.

#### Jeremy Sanquan Wright, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1006, 131 S. Ct. 507,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8549.

178 L. Ed. 2d 376,

November 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 594 F.3d 259.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          50,931
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,483
<ALLOWANCES>                                       451
<INVENTORY>                                      6,822
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                81,540
<PP&E>                                         346,911
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,486
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 732,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           50,660
<BONDS>                                        500,975
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   732,709
<SALES>                                         16,629
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,355
<CGS>                                           27,494
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   65,696
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                69,268
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,242
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,136
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (91,276)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2014024EN.01000701.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/7

---

Action brought on 14 November 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-576/13)

2014/C 24/12

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: L. Nicolae and S. Pardo Quintillán, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare, pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, that, by requiring, as a general rule, cargo handling undertakings operating in Spanish ports of general interest to participate in a SAGEP (Sociedad Anónima de Gestión de Estibadores Portuarios, a public limited company for the management of port cargo handlers) and in any event by not permitting them to have recourse to the market, for the purposes of recruiting their own personnel, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, unless the workers put forward by the SAGEP are unsuitable or insufficient, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare, pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, that, by requiring, as a general rule, cargo handling undertakings operating in Spanish ports of general interest to participate in a SAGEP (Sociedad Anónima de Gestión de Estibadores Portuarios, a public limited company for the management of port cargo handlers) and in any event by not permitting them to have recourse to the market, for the purposes of recruiting their own personnel, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, unless the workers put forward by the SAGEP are unsuitable or insufficient, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

| — | Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action brought by the European Commission against the Kingdom of Spain concerns the body of rules established by the Law on State Ports and the Merchant Navy in relation to cargo handling undertakings, with regard to the management of the workers involved in port cargo handling services.

The Commission takes the view that those rules — by requiring, as a general rule, cargo handling undertakings operating in Spanish ports of general interest to participate in a SAGEP and in any event by not permitting them to have recourse to the market, for the purposes of recruiting their own personnel, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, unless the workers put forward by the SAGEP are unsuitable or insufficient — are contrary to the Kingdom of Spain’s obligations under Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on freedom of establishment.

---
#### Lichtman v. New110

02/01/2016

585 EAL (2015)

110

. Justice EAKIN did not participate in the decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Cmwlth., 122 A.3d 510
# C_2016059EN.01001302.xml

| 15.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 59/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 59/13

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 December 2015 — Italy v Commission

(Case T-275/13) (1)

1

((Languages - Notice of open competition for the recruitment of administrators - Choice of second language from three languages - Language of communication with the candidates to the competition - Regulation No 1 - Article 1d(1), Article 27, first paragraph, and Article 28(f) of the Staff Regulations - Principle of non-discrimination - Proportionality))

(2016/C 059/13)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and by P. Gentili and S. Fiorentino, avvocati dello Stato)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by J. Currall, B. Eggers and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: J. García-Valdecasas Dorrego, abogado del Estado)

Intervener in support of the applicant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and B. Beutler, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of notice of open competition EPSO/AD/249/13 to draw up two reserve lists for administrations to fill vacant posts in the fields of macroeconomics and financial economics (OJ 2013 C 75 A, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Annuls the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/249/13 to draw up two reserve lists for administrations to fill vacant posts in the fields of macroeconomics and financial economics; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Annuls the notice of open competition EPSO/AD/249/13 to draw up two reserve lists for administrations to fill vacant posts in the fields of macroeconomics and financial economics;

| 2) | Orders the European Commission to bear, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the Italian Republic; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the European Commission to bear, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the Italian Republic;

| 3) | Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the Federal Republic of Germany to bear their own costs relating to their interventions. |
| --- | --- |

3)

Orders the Kingdom of Spain and the Federal Republic of Germany to bear their own costs relating to their interventions.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---
# C_2013325EN.01001201.xml

| 9.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 325/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/12

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Autorità per la Vigilanza sui Contratti pubblici di lavori, servizi e forniture (Italy) lodged on 25 July 2013 — Emmeci v Cotral

(Case C-427/13)

2013/C 325/19

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Autorità per la Vigilanza sui Contratti pubblici di lavori, servizi e forniture

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Emmeci Srl

Applicant:

Defendant: Cotral SpA

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 56 of Directive 2004/17/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that it is not permissible for the national legislature to allow contracting authorities to prevent competitors, during the final bid phase, from viewing their rankings or the bids made by other economic operators, and to postpone disclosure of that information until the end of the auction? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 56 of Directive 2004/17/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that it is not permissible for the national legislature to allow contracting authorities to prevent competitors, during the final bid phase, from viewing their rankings or the bids made by other economic operators, and to postpone disclosure of that information until the end of the auction?

1

| 2. | Do Article 56 of Directive 2004/17/EC and the principles of transparency and equal treatment preclude national legislation or administrative practices, such as those described in these proceedings, which provide for a five-minute ‘black-out’ in the final phase of the electronic auction, during which competitors are unable to ascertain their respective rankings? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Do Article 56 of Directive 2004/17/EC and the principles of transparency and equal treatment preclude national legislation or administrative practices, such as those described in these proceedings, which provide for a five-minute ‘black-out’ in the final phase of the electronic auction, during which competitors are unable to ascertain their respective rankings?

---

(1)  Directive 2004/17/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 1).

1

---
No. D-2492.

#### In the Matter of Disbarment of Patrick D. McNeal.

562 U.S. 999, 131 S. Ct. 556,

178 L. Ed. 2d 410,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8369.

November 1, 2010.

Disbarment entered.

*411Former order, 561 U.S. 1045, 131 S. Ct. 43, 177 L. Ed. 2d 1133, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 5554.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . 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. 02-40925 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JULIAN HUMBERTO SANCHEZ-POMPA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-02-CR-46-1

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Julian Humberto Sanchez-Pompa appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Sanchez-Pompa argues that the sentencing provisions in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are unconstitutional on their face and as applied in his case. He contends that the unconstitutional portions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326 should be severed from the statute. He asks usNo. 02-40925 -2- to vacate his conviction and sentence, reform the judgment to reflect a conviction only under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), and remand his case for resentencing under that provision.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Sanchez-Pompa acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been called into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 489-90 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; 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). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. The Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
# DLA Energy Americas leaders shape strategic future

/ Published March 9, 2023
HOUSTON, Texas, 
Defense Logistics Agency Energy Americas shaped a strategic plan and a way forward to better support the Warfighter and nation during a Senior Leader Offsite in Houston, Texas, Feb. 22-24.

The theme was “Present objectives defines future strategic operations: Where are we now? Where do we need to be? And, how do we get there?”

“Through this theme, we were able to identify opportunities that will enhance our current and future operations and bolster the decision-making process,” said DLA Energy Americas Commander Army Col. Josielyn Carrasquillo. “Ultimately, our goal is to reduce supply chain vulnerabilities while improving processes, systems, and gaining the right talent over the next five to ten years.”

Over the course of three days, the leadership team examined in-depth numerous topics including using available assessment tools and data analytics to help make supply chain decisions; tracking electronic invoicing; evaluating how renewables impact the supply chain; employing disciplined innovation; supply chain challenges in a contested environment; secure fuel missions; and supply chain vulnerabilities at strategic locations.

The team evaluated ways to expand strategic partner engagements to share information, identify opportunities for mutually benefitable initiatives, and better facilitate challenges during supply chain disruptions.

Beyond operational and mission support objectives, the team worked to address the DLA Energy Americas Culture Action Plan, leadership, developmental training, immersion programs, and other human resources efforts.

“We had outstanding participation from the entire DLA Energy Americas staff and all three regions including Americas East, Americas North, and Americas West,” Carrasquillo said. “In addition, key leaders from DLA Energy Headquarters attended briefings and breakout sessions. These steadfast leaders were essential players throughout this event and shared valuable knowledge and expertise.”

To help address potential issues or hurdles, the team put their minds together to innovate, brainstorm and walkthrough various scenarios.

“The Americas offsite was full of great accomplishments, superb collaboration, and creative solutions to challenging problems,” Carrasquillo said. “But, most importantly, as I constantly witness within the Energy family, we came to this event as ONE Energy team ready to enhance the world-class support to our Warfighters and our Nation.”
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2578 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                        Calendar No. 93
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2578

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 15, 2019

                                Received

                              May 16, 2019

                          Read the first time

                              May 20, 2019

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program, 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 ``National Flood Insurance Program 
Extension Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM.

    (a) Financing.--Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act 
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking ``May 31, 2019'' and 
inserting ``September 30, 2019''.
    (b) Program Expiration.--Section 1319 of the National Flood 
Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4026) is amended by striking ``May 31, 
2019'' and inserting ``September 30, 2019''.
    (c) Retroactive Effective Date.--If this Act is enacted after May 
31, 2019, the amendments made by subsections (a) and (b) shall take 
effect as if enacted on May 31, 2019.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 14, 2019.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
                                                        Calendar No. 93

116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2578

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 20, 2019

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
No. 10-343.

#### Stefano Picciotto, et al., Petitioners v. Appeals Court of Massachusetts.

562 U.S. 1044, 131 S. Ct. 598,

178 L. Ed. 2d 435,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8999.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts denied.

Same case below, 457 Mass. 1002, 927 N.E.2d 998.
# DSCR cuts ribbon for Red Brick Fitness Center during grand opening

/ Published June 13, 2022
Richmond, Va., 
Employees from across Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia, attended the grand opening celebration for the new Red Brick Fitness Center hosted by Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management’s Morale, Welfare and Recreation Office June 8.

DLA Aviation Commander Brig. Gen. David Sanford, who is also the DSCR installation commander, kicked off the ceremony by thanking those who helped complete the project. The team responsible for ensuring the project stayed on track, completing it on time and for less cost than originally budgeted included the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and DLA Installation Management Richmond including members from their facility engineers and maintenance teams, and MWR.

 “This is a world-class gym and we take pride in this facility,” said Sanford. “Good mental and physical health are critical to consistent high, mission performance, and this fitness center shows our commitment.”

The installation’s previous fitness center was demolished to make room for the DLA Aviation Operations Center Phase 2, which gave installation leadership the opportunity to design and complete the new fitness center as a separate project.

David Gibson, director of DLA Installation Management Richmond, said Sanford helped the team get over hurdles with funding challenges.

Gibson acknowledged Tim Snyder, project engineer for the installation at the time, who is now with Defense Contract Management Agency, saying Snyder was the person who put the vision into place.

“This is the best fitness center in DLA.” Gibson said. “We look forward to supporting our patrons for years to come.”

The new fitness center is located in Building 32, in F and G bays and occupies 40,000 square feet. It houses a weight and cardio room, racquetball, basketball and volleyball courts, multipurpose room and a dedicated aerobics room. The men’s and women’s locker rooms also each have a steam room and sauna.

The Red Brick Fitness Center is open and free of charge to active duty, reserve and National Guard military members, DoD civilian employees, Coast Guard civilians, retirees and dependents of the former listed categories, as well as contract personnel who work full time at DSCR.