alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-83,989-03

EX PARTE MILTON WAYNE KAY, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. D120519CR IN THE 260TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM ORANGE COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of driving while

intoxicated, enhancedwith a prior felonyconviction, and sentenced to nineteen years’ imprisonment.

The First Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Kay v. State, No. 01-13-00595-CR (Tex.

App.—Houston [1 Dist.] July 24, 2014) (not designated for publication). st

Applicant contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance because trial counsel

failed to inform him of a seven-year plea offer. The trial court has determined that trial counsel’s
2

performance was deficient and that such deficient performance prejudiced Applicant. See Missouri

v. Frye, ___ U.S. ___, 132 S.Ct. 1399 (2012). The trial court recommends granting habeas relief.

The findings and recommendation are supported by the habeas record.

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. D120519-R in the 260th District Court of

Orange County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Orange

County to answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary

bench warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: April 6, 2016

Do not publish
No. 11-5010.

#### Angel Louis Pena, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 885, 132 S. Ct. 258,

181 L. Ed. 2d 150,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5778.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 407 Fed. Appx. 589.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 136 (Thursday, July 16, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38399]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18915]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RP98-61-000 and RP98-226-000]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Company; Notice of Technical Conference

July 10, 1998.
    In the Commission's order issued on June 19, 1998, in the above-
captioned proceeding, 83 FERC para. 61,301 (1998), the Commission 
ordered that a technical conference be convened to resolve issues 
raised by the filing. The conference to address the issues has been 
scheduled for July 29, 1998, at 10:00 a.m. in a room to be designated 
at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18915 Filed 7-15-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350 OF CHAPTER 63
OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE
  1.
    
    The Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended June 30, 2006 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 10-Q for the Quarterly Period ended June 30, 2006
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of Electric City Corp. and its subsidiaries.
 /s/ Jeffrey R. MistarzJeffrey R. MistarzChief Financial OfficerAugust 14, 2006
 - 38 -
**DoD 4000.25-1-M**

*DoD 4000.25-1-M, January, 2006*

*Change 1*

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP8.20. APPENDIX 8.20**

**PSEUDO SHIPMENT STATUS FORUNCONFIRMED MATERIEL RELEASE ORDERS**

AP3.20-1

1

APPENDIX 3.20

AP8.20-1

APPENDIX 8.20
No. 11M21.

#### Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman, Petitioner v. Barack H. Obama, President of the United States, et al.

565 U.S. 808, 132 S. Ct. 80,

181 L. Ed. 2d 12,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6696.

October 3, 2011.

Motion for leave to file a petition for writ of certiorari under seal granted.

Same case below, 394 U.S. App. D.C. 466, 637 F.3d 400.
No. 10-11039.

#### In re Kevin E. Burns, et ux., Petitioners.

565 U.S. 811, 132 S. Ct. 86,

181 L. Ed. 2d 17,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6709.

October 3, 2011.

Motion of petitioners for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioners are allowed until October 24, 2011, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
No. 10-11262.

#### Gerry W. Fowler, Sr., Petitioner v. Timothy F. Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury.

565 U.S. 811, 132 S. Ct. 87,

181 L. Ed. 2d 17,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6960.

October 3, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis *18denied. Petitioner is allowed until October 24, 2011, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
#### *State, Respondent, v. Yusuf, Petitioner,*

No. 91968-2.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 72056-2-I, June 15, 2015, 188 Wn. App. 1021. *Denied*December 2, 2015.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter C. Waller, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



|(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.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 |  |  |  |  |  |                              
|---------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------
|October 29, 2009 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ PETER C. WALLER          
|                 |  |  |  |  |  | Peter C. Waller              
|                 |  |  |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer      
|                 |  |  |  |  |  | (Principal Executive Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 130 (Wednesday, July 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18014]



[[Page 36886]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Final Environmental Assessment for BRAC 95 Disposal and Reuse of 
Fort Missoula, MT

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Pub. L. 101-510 (as amended), the Defense 
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, the Defense Base Closure and 
Realignment Commission recommended the closure of Fort Missoula, 
Montana.
    The Final Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates the environmental 
impacts of the disposal and subsequent reuse of the 52 acres. 
Alternatives examined in the EA include encumbered disposal of the 
property, unencumbered disposal of the property, and no action. 
Encumbered disposal refers to transfer or conveyance of property having 
restrictions on subsequent use as a result of any Army-imposed or legal 
restraint. Under the no action alternative, the Army would not dispose 
of property but would maintain it in caretaker status for an indefinite 
period.
    While disposal of Fort Missoula is the Army's primary action, the 
EA also analyzes the potential environmental effects of reuse as a 
secondary action by means of evaluating intensity-based reuse 
scenarios. The Army's preferred alternative for disposal of Fort 
Missoula property is encumbered disposal, with encumbrances pertaining 
to the possible presence of lead-based paint and asbestos-containing 
material, and the requirement for a right of reentry for environmental 
clean-up.
    A Notice of Intent (NOI) declaring the Army's intent to prepare an 
EA for the disposal and reuse of Fort Missoula was published in the 
Federal Register on September 22, 1995 (60 FR 49264).

DATES: Comments must be submitted on August 7, 1998. Comments received 
on this EA will be considered by the Army prior to initiating action.

COPIES: The Final EA is available for review at the Fort Missoula 
Public Library. A copy of the Final EA may be obtained by writing to 
Mr. Ken Brunner, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District (ATTN: 
CENWS-ED-TB-ER), 4735 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington 
98124-2255, or by facsimile at (206) 764-4470.

    Dated: July 1, 1998.
Raymond J. Fatz,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, (Environment, Safety and 
Occupational Health), OASA (I,L&E).
[FR Doc. 98-18014 Filed 7-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-10-M
No. 10-6765.

#### Thelma Williams, Jr., Petitioner v. Paige Cline, et al.

562 U.S. 1176, 131 S. Ct. 1036,

178 L. Ed. 2d 823,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 745.

January 18, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied.
No. 10-10894.

#### Robert John Jeffery, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 855, 132 S. Ct. 187,

181 L. Ed. 2d 95,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6267.

October 3, 2011.

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

Same case below, 631 F.3d 669.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 16 (Monday, January 26, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3724-3725]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1809]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Office of Environmental Management; Environmental Management 
Advisory Board Renewal

    Pursuant to Section 14(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Public Law 92-463), and in accordance with Title 41 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations, section 101-6.1015(a), and following consultation 
with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services 
Administration, notice is hereby given that the Environmental 
Management Advisory Board has been renewed for a two-year period 
beginning on January 17, 1998. The Board will provide advice to the 
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
    The purpose of the Board is to provide the Assistant Secretary for 
Environmental Management with advice and recommendations on 
Environmental Management projects and issues, such as program budget, 
strategic planning, risk, technology development, the National 
Environmental Policy Act, long-term nuclear stewardship, science 
initiatives, worker health and safety, and program cost effectiveness, 
from the perspective of affected groups and State Tribal, and local 
governments. Consensus recommendations to the Department of Energy from 
the Board on programmatic nationwide resolution of numerous difficult 
issues will help achieve the Department's objective of an integrated 
environmental restoration program.
    Additionally, the renewal of the Environmental Management Advisory 
Board has been determined to be essential to the conduct of Department 
of Energy business and to be in the public interest in connection with 
the performance of duties imposed on the Department of Energy by law. 
The Board will operate in accordance with the

[[Page 3725]]

provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of 
Energy Organization Act (Public Law 95-91), and rules and regulations 
issued in implementation of those Acts.
    Further information regarding this Advisory Board may be obtained 
from Rachel Samuel at (202) 586-3279.

    Issued in Washington, D.C. on January 16, 1998.
James N. Solit,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-1809 Filed 1-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-M
No. 10-10967.

#### Brian Keith Thomas, Petitioner v. Louisiana.

565 U.S. 859, 132 S. Ct. 196,

181 L. Ed. 2d 102,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6122.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit, denied.

Same case below, 48 So. 3d 1210.
If there were a 

vaccine against 

cancer, wouldn’t 

you get it for 

your kids?

HPV vaccine is

cancer prevention. 

Talk to the doctor 

about vaccinating

your 11–12 year old

sons and daughters 

against HPV.

www.cdc.gov/vaccines/teens

Distributed by:

CS249586-I
No. 10-7578.

#### Norman Oliver Grant, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1155, 131 S. Ct. 950,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 118.

178 L. Ed. 2d 784,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Able Energy, Inc. (the "Company"), on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Gregory D. Frost, Chief Executive Officer of
the Company and Daniel L. Johnston, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do
each hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. ss. 1350), that to his knowledge:





(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/
      Gregory D. FrostGregory
      D. FrostChief
      Executive Officer and Chairman of the BoardApril
      2, 2008/s/Daniel
      L. JohnstonDaniel
      L. JohnstonChief
      Financial OfficerApril
      2, 2008








[A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Able Energy, Inc. and will be retained by Able Energy, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.]
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 132 (Friday, July 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37369-37370]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18372]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-283-000]

Ozark Gas Transmission System; Notice of Tariff Filing

July 6, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 30, 1998, Ozark Gas Transmission System 
(Ozark), tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First 
Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with an effective 
date of August 1, 1998:

First Revised Sheet No. 13B
Third Revised Sheet No. 43
Second Revised Sheet No. 43A
Third Revised Sheet No. 43B
Second Revised Sheet No. 45

    Ozark states that it is submitting these revised tariff sheets to 
incorporate the Gas Industry Standards Board (GISB) Version 1.2 
Standards adopted by Order No. 587-G. Ozark proposes an August 1, 1998 
effective date for these sheets.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission

[[Page 37370]]

in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve 
to make protestants parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection 
in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18372 Filed 7-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                            2037
<SECURITIES>                                      1438
<RECEIVABLES>                                    27278
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1263
<INVENTORY>                                       9890
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 43305
<PP&E>                                          104329
<DEPRECIATION>                                   62601
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  102934
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            10525
<BONDS>                                            462
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         53125
<OTHER-SE>                                       35142
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    102934
<SALES>                                         166525
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                166525
<CGS>                                           113740
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   113740
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 30856
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  40
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  24041
<INCOME-TAX>                                      8918
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              15123
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     15123
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .93
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .93


</TABLE>
DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

1

DIC FL1/FL2/GL1/GL2 FORMAT

RETAIL LOSS ALLOWANCE

Field Legend Position(s) Entry and Instructions

DI Code 1-3 Enter 

FL1 or GL1 (credit reversal) 

FL2 or GL2 (credit).

RI Code 4-6 Enter the RI code of the billing office.

Blank 7-29 Leave blank.

Billed Office (DoDAAC) 30-35 Enter the DoDAAC of the billed office.

Year within Decade and 

Month

36-38 Enter the year within decade and the 

month in which the allowance was 

allowed.

E.g., Jan 2000 will be entered as 001.

Blank 39-44 Leave blank.

Billing Office (DoDAAC) 45-50 Enter the DoDAAC of the billing office.

Blank 51 Leave blank.

Fund Code 52-53 For interfund enter the fund code from the 

FS_ record. Otherwise, may be left blank.

Bill Number 54-58 Enter the bill number from the FS_ record..

Blank 56-64 Leave blank.

Amount 65-73 Enter the amount of allowance.

65-71 Dollars

72-73 Cents.

Blank 74-80 Leave blank.
No. 85-495.

#### Ansonia Board of Education et al. *v.*Philbrook et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. [Certiorari granted, 474 U. S. 1080.] Motion of respondents Ansonia Federation of Teachers et al. for divided argument granted.
#### *State, Respondent, v. Smith, Petitioner,*

No. 92179-2.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 71938-6-I, July 20, 2015, 188 Wn. App. 1060. *Denied*February 10, 2016.
NO. SCPW-12-0000022
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I
BURKE MCPHEETERS BORDNER & ESTES, Petitioner,

vs. THE HONORABLE RANDAL G.B VALENCIANO, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, STATE OF HAWAI # I and DTRIC INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, Respondents.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (CIVIL NO. 11-1-0076)

ORDER (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Duffy, and McKenna, JJ. and Circuit Judge Chan, in place of Acoba, J., recused) Upon consideration of petitioner Burke McPheeters Bordner & Estes' petition for a writ of mandamus and the responses thereto, it appears that: (1) Cades Schutte, as a result of its representation of petitioner, obtained confidential information of a non-public nature that, if known to any other client of Cades Schutte, could be used by such client to petitioner's material disadvantage and (2) petitioner's December 30, 2009 advanced conflict waiver did not, by its terms, apply in such instance. Therefore, Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPW-12-0000022 17-MAY-2012 04:10 PM2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for a writ of mandamus is granted. The respondent judge is directed to: (1) vacate the December 12, 2011 order denying petitioner's motion to disqualify Cades Schutte as plaintiff's counsel in Civil No. 11- 1-0076 and (2) enter an order disqualifying Cades Schutte as plaintiff's counsel in Civil No. 11-1-0076.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, May 17, 2012. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ James E. Duffy, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Derrick H.M. Chan
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 31, 2023

NO. 03-22-00678-CR

Matthew Clay Bode, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 207TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES BAKER, TRIANA AND SMITH

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of 

conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs 

is made.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

RULES 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a),

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, James D. Fielding, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of
Claires Stores, Inc.; and

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.



|               |  |  |  |                        
|-------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|April 24, 2013 |  |  |  | /s/ James D. Fielding  
|               |  |  |  | James D. Fielding      
|               |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
**DoD 4000.25-1-M,***April 28, 2004*

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP6.24. APPENDIX 6.24**

**DEFENSE LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT STANDARDS/LEGACY MILSTRIP REVISION IMPLEMENTATION REPORT**

**STATUS REPORT**

**APPROVED MILSTRIP CHANGES/APPROVED DLMS CHANGES**

APPROVED MILSTRIP CHANGE/APPROVED

DLMS CHANGE NO:	AS OF: _________________

STATUS:  (Provide narrative as to current status and whether effort is on target.  Address any problems that may prevent meeting the implementation date and planned action to recover.  Final report should include S/A implementing publication number/system identification/subsystem identification, as applicable.)

**1**

APPENDIX 1.24

AP6.24-1

APPENDIX 6.24