alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# H08-/¥ ELECTRONIC RECORD COA # 10-13-00388-CR 

### OFFENSE: Murder STYLE: Felix Resendez v. The State ofTexas COUNTY: McLennan TRIAL COURT: 54th District Court TRIAL COURT #: 2012-965-C2 TRIAL COURTJUDGE: Hon. Matt Johnson DISPOSITION: Affirmed 

### DATE: September 11, 2014 

### JUSTICE: ChiefJustice Gray PC 

## PUBLISH: DNPT FOR REHEARING IS: 

## DATE: JUDGE:

CLK RECORD: RPT RECORD: STATE BR: APPBR: 

### November 27; 2013 

### January 15, 2014 August 15, 2014 July 18, 2014 SUPP CLKRECORD: SUPPRPTRECORD: SUPP BR: PROSE BR:



### IN THE COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS ELECTRONIC RECORD CCA # 

# PRO S£ Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

# DATE: 03-lpylU&IJJUDGE: 

# fM?4, V^U^j^ Disposition: DATE: JUDGE: 

### SIGNED:. PUBLISH: MOTION

PC: DNP: MOTION FOR REHEARING IN MOTION FOR STAY OF MANDATE IS: CCA IS: JUDGE: ON ON JUDGE:
# Following tragedy, local TV personality shares message 

/ Published Aug. 3, 2016
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
“I have great memories of Maria. There’s a problem with memories. You can’t hug a memory, you can’t hold a memory, and you can’t call a memory on the phone.

“It’s a pain that never dulls.”

That was just part of the powerful message delivered by Dom Tiberi when he spent an hour with associates from Defense Supply Center Columbus inside the Building 20 auditorium July 21.

Tiberi, the local Columbus Channel 10 sports anchor, shared the story of his own 21-year-old daughter, who was killed on Sept. 17, 2013, in an accident that was likely the result of distracted driving. The vehicle driven by Maria Tiberi slammed into the back of a stopped tractor-trailer five minutes after she left home, killing her.

“I have a job, and that’s with 10TV doing the sports,” Tiberi said. “But I have a mission, and my mission is trying to put an end to what is truly an epidemic in our country.

“Distracted driving is so many different things. It’s anything that takes your hands off the wheel, eyes of the road and mind off your driving. We’re all guilty of it and we all need to set a better example because our kids are watching.”

Tiberi launched “Maria’s Message”—a campaign to remind people on the dangers of distracted driving. He speaks to high school and college students, telling Maria’s story, and he also started Maria’s Foundation, which buys distracted driving simulators for high schools. 

Statistically, the leading cause of death for ages 5-24 is from motor vehicle crashes. For all age groups, heart disease is the leading killer followed by cancer and auto accidents.

"Which one of these is preventable?" asked Tiberi of those in attendance.

An emotional Tiberi challenged the DSCC community to be leaders and not let people drive distracted. Tiberi has spent his time to bring "Maria's Message" to 65 high schools. He said he has started talking to older audiences like this one because parents and others need to set a better example. 

“What can we do? We have to hammer our kids. We can’t write our way out of this nightmare with tickets. We have to do it through education. We have to do it by setting a better example.

“I’m in a club no parent wants to join. It’s like groundhog day and I wake up every day and say ‘Is this real?’

“The worst part of the whole thing was leaving her at the hospital, and I don’t want any more kids being left at the hospital. The reason I do this is because I couldn’t bring her home.”

Three times a year his foundation provides free defensive driving classes for 100 kids in Columbus. He said they partner with a school that has some of the finest driving instructors in the county, who teach the CIA and FBI. He has testified before state legislatures on ways to enact stricter distracted driving laws and works tirelessly to enhance the education provided in schools, including the simulators.

"This is a heavy subject, but this is my mission. As parents we always want to be a safety net. We want to be there to give our kids a second chance. But with death, there are no do-overs.”
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 122 (Thursday, June 25, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 34618]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16796]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IA 048-1048b; FRL-6113-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Approval 
Under Section 112(l); State of Iowa

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revisions submitted by the state of Iowa. These revisions are 
necessary to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act) and the 
Code of Federal Regulations and to improve the state's permitting 
program. These revisions will strengthen the SIP with respect to 
attainment and maintenance of established air quality standards and 
with respect to control of hazardous air pollutants.
    In the final rules section of the Federal Register, the EPA is 
approving the state's SIP revisions as a direct final rule without 
prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial 
revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse comments. A 
detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final 
rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received in response to this 
proposed rule, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this 
rule. If the EPA receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final 
rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. The 
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this document. Any 
parties interested in commenting on this document should do so at this 
time.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received in writing by 
July 27, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Wayne Kaiser, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 726 Minnesota 
Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Kaiser at (913) 551-7603.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the direct 
final rule which is located in the rules section of the Federal 
Register.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: May 26, 1998.

William Rice,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VII.
[FR Doc. 98-16796 Filed 6-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 32.2*

                           Section 1350 Certification


      I, Steven G. Larson, the chief financial officer of Drexler Technology
Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), certify pursuant to section
1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to my knowledge:

      (i) Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the Annual Report of the Company on
Form 10-K for the period ending March 31, 2003 (the "Report"), fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), whichever is applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

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


Date: September 29, 2003


/s/ Steven G. Larson
--------------------------
Steven G. Larson


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

*  The material contained in this Exhibit 32.2 is not deemed "filed" with the
   SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
   Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of
   1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any
   general incorporation language contained in such filing.








                                       67
Exhibit 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of Scottish Annuity & Life Holdings,
Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael C. French, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

/s/ Michael C. French


Michael C. French
Chief Executive Officer
August 7, 2002
No. 10-6804 (10A349).

#### Donald Ray Wackerly, II, Petitioner v. Oklahoma.

562 U.S. 978, 131 S. Ct. 500,

178 L. Ed. 2d 318,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8127.

October 14, 2010.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death, presented to Justice Sotomayor, and by her referred to the Court, denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma denied.

Same case below, 237 P.3d 795.
No. 10-6469.

#### Joseph Reid, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 989, 131 S. Ct. 433,

178 L. Ed. 2d 336,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8265.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
No. 09-1533.

#### Frantz DePierre, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 960, 131 S. Ct. 458,

178 L. Ed. 2d 286,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8010.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit granted.

Same case below, 599 F.3d 25.
#### People v Barksdale

4th Dept: 140 AD3d 1778 (Erie)

denied 8/19/16 (Stein, J.)
No. 10-5846.

#### Courtney C. Dixie, Petitioner v. Bill K. Wilson, Superintendent, Indiana State Prison.

562 U.S. 968, 131 S. Ct. 471,

178 L. Ed. 2d 300,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7973.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
No. 09-1544.

#### Edward R. Vrdolyak, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 948, 131 S. Ct. 200,

178 L. Ed. 2d 244,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7777.

October 4, 2010.

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

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 593 F.3d 676.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333- 108416, 333-103515, and 333-85486 on Form S-3 of Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC(formerly Duke Power Company LLC, which was formally Duke Energy Corporation) of our report dated March 15, 2007, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (which report expresses anunqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph regarding the April 3, 2006 conversion to a limited liability company and the transfer of a subsidiary to its parent), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Duke Energy Carolinas,LLC for the year ended December 31, 2006. 

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Charlotte, North Carolina 

March 15, 2007
EXHIBIT
32.2




CERTIFICATION
OF 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,
Steven G. Larson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:




(i)           the
Annual Report of LaserCard Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the
period ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements
of section 13(a) or 15(d), whichever is applicable, of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended, and




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




Date:
June 15, 2009


/s/Steven
      G. LarsonSteven
      G. LarsonChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial
Officer)
EXHIBIT 32.2



Certification under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Companys chief financial officer certifies as follows:



(a) This Report on Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of
Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.



(b) The information contained in this Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|/s/Eleanor J. Whitehurst                       
|-----------------------------------------------
|Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
|Date: August 11, 2003                          



32
IN THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS

HANDDOWN LIST OF NOVEMBER 17, 2015

WESTERN DISTRICT

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD78056 In the Matter of The Care and Treatment of Norman Toler a/k/a 

Norman L. Toler, a/k/a Norman Lee Toler vs. State of Missouri

WD78144 Bryan Lankford vs. Mid-Century Insurance Company

WD78209 Leslie Swinney vs. James Nicholson

WD78252 Cody Warden vs. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company

WD78347 Keith Churchill vs. Tina Churchill

WD78526 Mickie Shank et al. vs. Missouri National Education Association

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 30.25(b)

AND ISSUED PER CURIAM

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

WD78081 State of Missouri vs. Cody Allen Ramsey
No. 10-6134.

#### Mark DuHall, Petitioner v. Lennar Family of Builders.

562 U.S. 1010, 131 S. Ct. 518,

178 L. Ed. 2d 383,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8527,

November 1, 2010.

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

Same case below, 382 Fed. Appx. 751.
No. 10-6378.

#### Leopoldo Gonzalez-Hurtado, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 987, 131 S. Ct. 428,

178 L. Ed. 2d 333,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8283.

October 18, 2010.

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

Same case below, 383 Fed. Appx. 665.
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.5.3
 LETTER AMENDMENT
  
  Credit Agreement
    Fee Letters




---



##### 



2




---



##### 



Very truly yours,CRICKET COMMUNICATIONS, INC.By:
    /s/ Dean M. LuvisaName:
    Dean M. LuvisaTitle:
    VP Finance LEAP WIRELESS INTERNATIONAL, INC.By:
    /s/ Dean M. LuvisaName:
    Dean M. LuvisaTitle:
    VP Finance




---



##### 



Accepted and agreed:
CITICORP NORTH AMERICA, INC.,
as Administrative Agent and as a LenderBy:
    /s/ Ross MacIntyreName:
    Ross MacIntyreTitle:
    Managing Director and Vice President




---



##### 



Accepted and agreed:
GOLDMAN SACHS CREDIT PARTNERS L.P.,
as a LenderBy:
    /s/ IllegibleName:Title:
    Authorized signatory
Anna Ostrovsky




---



##### 



Accepted and agreed:
BANC OF AMERICA BRIDGE LLC, as a LenderBy:
    /s/ J. M. RoteName:
    John RoteTitle:
    Managing Director




---



##### 



Accepted and agreed:
DEUTSCHE BANK AG CAYMAN ISLANDS
BRANCH, as a LenderBy:
    /s/ Anca TrifanName:
    Anca TrifanTitle:
    Director By:
    /s/ M. TarkingtonName:
    Marcus M. TarkingtonTitle:
    Director




---



##### 



Accepted and agreed:
MORGAN STANLEY SENIOR FUNDING, INC., as a LenderBy:
    /s/ Andrew W. EarlsName:
    Andrew EarlsTitle:
    VP
#### In the Matter of Gary Hsin Liang et al., Petitioners, v State of New York Industrial Board of Appeals et al., Respondents.

[61 NYS3d 25]—

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the State of New York Industrial Board of Appeals dated August 7, 2014, which, after a hearing, affirmed an order of the Commissioner of Labor for the State of New York, dated May 11, 2011, finding that the petitioner Gary Hsin Liang had violated article 19 of the Labor Law, and directing him to pay unpaid wages, interest, and civil penalties.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

Judicial review of an administrative determination made after a hearing required by law, and at which evidence was taken, is limited to whether that determination is supported by substantial evidence *(see*CPLR 7803 [4]; *Matter of Purdy v Kreisberg,*47 NY2d 354, 358 [1979]; *Matter of MVM Constr, LLC v Westchester County,*150 AD3d 857 [2017]; *Matter of Congregation K’hal Torath Chaim, Inc. v Rockland County Bd. of Health,*148 AD3d 1145 [2017]). Substantial evidence means such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact (see *Rainer N. Mittl, Ophthalmologist, PC. v New York State Div. of Human Rights,*100 NY2d 326, 331 [2003]; *300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176, 180 [1978]; *Matter of Moser v Ramkissoon,*147 AD3d 1064, 1065 [2017]; *Matter of Briggs v New York State Div. of Human Rights,*142 AD3d 663, 664 [2016]). Here, there was sufficient relevant proof to support the determination of the State of New York Industrial Board of Appeals (hereinafter the IBA) that the complainant was an employee of the petitioner Happy Lemon, Inc., and the petitioner Gary Hsin Liang was an employer pursuant to article 19 of the Labor Law, and, therefore, Liang was required to pay the complainant unpaid wages. Contrary to the petitioners’ contention, there is no evidence that the complainant was a shareholder of Happy Lemon, Inc., during the relevant period.

The petitioners’ remaining contention, in Point III of their brief, is not properly before this Court, as they failed to raise it on their appeal to the IBA *(see Matter of Peckham v Calogero,*12 NY3d 424, 430 [2009]).

Rivera, J.P., Hall, Barros and Brathwaite Nelson, JJ., concur.
# C_2013207EN.01005804.xml

| 20.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 207/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 207/58

---

Action brought on 18 April 2013 — ZZ v Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

(Case F-36/13)

2013/C 207/99

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision to terminate the applicant’s contract of employment on the basis of Article 47(c)(i) of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants (CEOS).

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 24 July 2012 of the Agency; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 24 July 2012 of the Agency;

| — | In consequence:






  — | restore the applicant to his post with effect from 25 October 2012 and order the Agency to pay his remuneration with retroactive effect; |
| --- | --- | --- |

—

In consequence:

—

restore the applicant to his post with effect from 25 October 2012 and order the Agency to pay his remuneration with retroactive effect;

| — | withdraw the contested decision from the applicant’s personnel file and all documents connected with the present proceedings; |
| --- | --- |

—

withdraw the contested decision from the applicant’s personnel file and all documents connected with the present proceedings;

| — | Order the Agency to pay him the sum of EUR 10 000 as compensation for the non-pecuniary harm suffered; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Agency to pay him the sum of EUR 10 000 as compensation for the non-pecuniary harm suffered;

| — | Order the Agency to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Agency to pay the costs.

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 33964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16464]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Antarctic Tour Operators Meeting, Notice

    The National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

    Name: Antarctic Tour Operators Meeting.
    Date and Time: July 16, 1998, 12:30 p.m.-5:00 p.m.
    Place: National Science Foundation, Room 375, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Nadene G. Kennedy, Polar Coordination 
Specialist, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 
Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone: 703/306-1030; Fax: 703/306-0139.
    Purpose of Meeting: Pursuant to the National Science 
Foundation's responsibilities under the Antarctic Conservation Act 
(P.L. 95-541) and the Antarctic Treaty, the U.S. Antarctic Program 
Managers plan to meet with Antarctic Tour Operators to exchange 
information concerning dates and procedures for visiting U.S. 
antarctic stations, review the latest Antarctic Treaty 
Recommendations concerning the environment and protected sites, and 
other items designed to protect the Antarctic environment.

Agenda

    <bullet> Introduction and Overview.
    <bullet> Review of 1997-98 Visits to McMurdo, Palmer and South 
Pole Stations.
    <bullet> Tour Operator's Comments on 1997-98 Season Visits.
    <bullet> 1998-99 Visits to McMurdo, Palmer and South Pole 
Stations.
    <bullet> Report from the International Association of Antarctic 
Tour Operators (IAATO).
    <bullet> Information Dissemination.
    <bullet> Yachting Activities in the Antarctic Peninsula.
    <bullet> Update on Peninsula Site Inventory Project.
    <bullet> Australian Approach to Tourism Management and 
Government Activities.
    <bullet> Other Items.
Nadene G. Kennedy,
Polar Coordination Specialist, Office of Polar Programs.
[FR Doc. 98-16464 Filed 6-19-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2622 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the credit for 

production of refined coal. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2019 

Mr. GIANFORTE (for himself and Mr. MCKINLEY) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the credit for production of refined coal. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF REFINED COAL PRODUCTION 

4 TAX CREDIT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 45(e)(8) of the Internal 

6 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘10-year 

8 period’’ each place it appears and inserting ‘‘12-year 

9 period’’, and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2622 IH

1 (2) in subparagraph (D)(ii)(II), by striking 

2 ‘‘10-year period’’ and inserting ‘‘12-year period’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

4 this section shall apply to coal produced and sold after 

5 December 31, 2018. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
March 28, 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JACKIE LEE HALEY , Appellant

NO. 14

- 11

- 00440

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the reco rd of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
No. 12-8531.

#### Triplett *v.*Donahoe, Postmaster General.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 10M8.

#### Dorsey Taylor, Petitioner v. Fred Britten, Warden, et al.

562 U.S. 819, 131 S. Ct. 374,

178 L. Ed. 2d 10,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6281.

October 4, 2010.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.