alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-24-00243-CR

SONNY MARQUEZ,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 19th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2023-1190-C1

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Sonny Marquez, filed a pro se notice of appeal attempting to appeal his 

conviction and sentence imposed on May 28, 2024. Because Marquez expressly waived 

his right to appeal, we dismiss this appeal.

When the defendant is the appellant, the record must include the trial court’s 

certification of the defendant’s right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d). Texas Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 25.2 grants defendants who plead guilty as part of a plea bargain 
Marquez v. State Page 2

the right to appeal only “(A) those matters that were raised by written motion filed and 

ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s permission to appeal, or (C) where 

the specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.” See id. R. 25.2(a)(2). When an 

appellant waives his right to appeal as part of his plea agreement with the State, a 

subsequent notice of appeal filed by him fails to “initiate the appellate process.” Lundgren 

v. State, 434 S.W.3d 594, 599 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). Here, pursuant to a plea agreement 

with the State, Marquez pled guilty to the offense of possession of a controlled substance 

on May 28, 2024 and was sentenced to five years in prison.1 The trial court’s certification 

of defendant’s right to appeal was signed by the trial court, Marquez, and his counsel, 

and states that this “is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal” 

and that “the defendant has waived the right to appeal.”

Absent a trial court’s certification of appeal showing an appellant has the right to 

appeal, we must this dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see also Chavez v. State, 

183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (holding that the court of appeals must 

dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, regardless of the basis for the appeal, 

if the trial court’s certification shows there is no right to appeal). Accordingly, because 

the trial court’s certification shows there is no right to appeal, this appeal is dismissed.

1 According to the judgment, Marquez pled guilty to a state-jail-felony level possession of a controlled 

substance that was punished as a second-degree felony based on his plea of true to two felony enhancement 

paragraphs. Marquez acknowledges in his notice of appeal that the punishment assessed does not exceed 

the punishment agreed upon by the parties to the plea bargain agreement. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2).
Marquez v. State Page 3

STEVE SMITH

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray

Justice Johnson, and

Justice Smith

(Chief Justice Gray concurs)

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed August 15, 2024

Do not publish

[CR25]
# Baseline

# Sheet3
No. 10-10943.

#### Preston Bernard Thomas, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 858, 132 S. Ct. 193,

181 L. Ed. 2d 100,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6136.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
AP5.13 APPENDIX 5.1 3 

ACCEPTANCE ALERT 

Data Element Name 

Document Identifier 

PllN 

Purchasing Office 

Fiscal Year 

Type of Instrument 

Serial Number 

SPIIN: CalllOrder 

Identity Code: Contract 

Administration ADP Point 

Identity Code: Ship-To 

Shipment Identification 

Data: 

Shipment Number 

Record 

Positionfs) 

1 -3 

4-1 6 

(4-9) 

(10-1 1) 

(1 2) 

(1 3-1 6) 

17-20 

21 -26 

27-32 

33-40 

(33-39) 

Data Entriesi 

Must match the contract number to which it 

applies. 

A six-position DFARS, appendix G code. 

Numeric. 

A, C-H, K-M, P, S, V, or W. 

Rp 13-1 6: 0001 -9999; 

or rp 1 3: A-Z and rp 14-1 6: 001 -999; 

or rp 13-1 4: AA-ZZ and rp 15-1 6: 01 -99. 

I and 0 cannot be used. 

When required, it must match the master file 

for this procurement instrument. If the Type 

of Instrument in rp 12 is A, D, or G, then rp 

17-20 is four positions, alphanumeric. 

Otherwise, leave blank. 

Must be a valid DoDAAC. 

Must match the contract line to which it 

applies. If rp 27 is B, D, P, K, or T, do not 

validate. If rp 27 is code U and 28-32 is 

blank, do not validate. Otherwise, must be a 

valid DoDNX. 

33-35 alpha,; 36-39 alphanumeric. 
Data Element Name 

Shipment Number Suffix 

CLlN or ELIN: 

CLlN 

ELlN 

CLINIELIN Subline 

Quantity: 

Quantity Shipped 

Purchase Unit 

Stock Number 

Date Shipped: 

Year 

Month 

Procurement Quality 

Assurance (PQA) Site 

Special Contract 

Provision: Liquidated 

Damages Clause 

Cash Discount Stipulation 

Transaction Status 

Indicator 

Record 

Position!sJ 

(40) 

41 -46 

(41 -44) 

(4 1 -44) 

(45-46) 

47-54 

55-56 

57-69 

70-76 

(70-7 1 ) 

(72-74) 

(75-76) 

77 

78 

79 

80 

Data Entries 

Alpha or blank. 

Must match the contract line to which it 

applies. 

0001 -9999. 

Rp 41 must be an alpha and rp 42-44 may be 

any alphanumeric combination. I and 0 

cannot be used. 

AA-ZZ or blank. I and 0 cannot be used. 

Numeric. 

Alpha. 

No validation. 

Numeric year, with a possible X-overpunch in 

rp 70. 

JAN, FEB, MAR, APR, MAY, JUN, 

JUL, AUG, SEP, OCT, NOV, DEC. 

Applicable day for the month in rp 72-74. 

D or S. 

A or blank. 

D or N. 

May be 1, 2, E, or blank.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 6458

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. JIMMY CARLTON GILFILLAN, JR. , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Spartanburg

. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 7:18

- cr - 00980

- HMH

- 1 )

Submitted : August 5, 2021 Decided: August 26, 2021

Before MOTZ , WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Jimmy Carlton Gilfillan, Jr. , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jimmy Carlton Gilfillan, Jr., appeals the district court’s order construing Gilfillan’s motion for appointment for counsel as a motion for compassionate release pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) (i) , as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, § 603(b)(1), 132 Stat. 5194, 5239 , and denying both motion s
. We review a district court’s denial of a motion for compassionate release for an abuse of discretion. United
States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument wou ld not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3298 

To increase entitlement funding for child care. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 18, 2019 

Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To increase entitlement funding for child care. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Child Care Quality 

5 and Access Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN ENTITLEMENT FUNDING FOR CHILD 

7 CARE. 

8 Section 418(a)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 

9 U.S.C. 618(a)(3)) is amended by striking 

10 ‘‘$2,917,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2017 and 2018’’ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 3298 IH

1 and inserting ‘‘$3,917,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

2 2020 and 2021’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
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 Sun River Energy, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending July 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JF Hoover, Chief Financial Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief.


(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 results of operations of the Company.





Dated: September 21, 2012


/s/ JF Hoover

JF Hoover,Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8146

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

THOMAS MONIQUE BRADDY, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith, 

District Judge. (4:07-cr-00048-RBS-TEM-1)

Submitted: June 1, 2010 Decided: June 7, 2010

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas Monique Braddy, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Howard Jacob 

Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorney, Newport News, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Thomas Monique Braddy, Jr., appeals the district 

court’s order treating his motion for writ of mandamus as a 

successive 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2009) motion and 

dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless 

a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of 

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that

Braddy has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-40397 Conference Calendar

__________________ RICHARD G. KELLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus HAROLD NIX & ASSOCIATES, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:95-CV-11 - - - - - - - - - - March 1, 1996 Before GARWOOD, JONES, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Richard G. Kelley appeals the dismissal of his lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have reviewed the record, and we detect no error. Accordingly, we affirm for essentially the reasons given by the district court. See Kelley v. Harold Nix & Assocs. , No. 5:95-CV-11 (E.D. Tex. Apr. 27, 1995). AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 31.2
 
      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 registrant, 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 registrant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; andd)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control
over financial reporting; and
  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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
 April 21, 2011
    /s/ J. Per BrodinJ. Per BrodinChief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001066745
<NAME> ESPERION THERAPEUTICS, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          22,685
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                23,084
<PP&E>                                           2,937
<DEPRECIATION>                                    (799)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  25,877
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           (5,370)
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                       (219)
<COMMON>                                            (2)
<OTHER-SE>                                     (18,311)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   (25,877)
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,892
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (685)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (11,207)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (11,207)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (11,207)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (16.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (16.28)


</TABLE>
View Auction Results Auction Details

A0008124 -- CONUS wide Scrap electronics, D4R, DMF and DEMIL

End Date 2020-08-04 11:52:35.156

Winning Bid 0.68001 USD

Products

SL0000102 Controlled and Non-Controlled Electronics Property CONUS wide Quantity 117000000 ( LB )

Bid History

Winning Bid Bidder Name Bid Amount Bid On Withdrawal Date/Time

Nicholas Mesick 0.011 USD 2020-08-04 11:51:30.723

Nicholas Mesick 0.11 USD 2020-08-04 11:51:35.448

Garrett Powell 0.6 USD 2020-08-04 11:51:05.356

Garrett Powell 0.06 USD 2020-08-04 11:51:00.13

James Levine 0.68001 USD 2020-08-04 11:52:00.957

DLA Disposition Services ESales Technical Issues or

Questions:

Please Call 1-877-DLACALL

DLA Auction Site https://www.sales.dla.mil/dlab2b/buyer/showpublishedauction.do

1 of 1 8/4/2020, 2:07 PM
(logo) Rialto

CAPITAL

 

 

**2018 Annual Statement of Servicer Compliance (Item1123)**

 

 

Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") dated asof November 1, 2016 by and among CCRE Commercial Mortgage Securities, L.P. as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as MasterServicer, Rialto CapitalAdvisors, LLC asSpecial Servicer, AEGON USA Realty Advisors, LLC as Potomac Mills Special Servicer, Park Bridge LenderServices LLC as Operating Advisor and Asset Representations Reviewer, Wilmington Trust, National Association as Trusteeand Wells Fargo Bank, National Associationas Certificate Administrator, Paying Agent, and Custodian relating to the CFCRE 2016-C6 Mortgage Trust,Commercial MortgagePass-Through Certificates, Series 2016-C6 **(****CFC****R****E20****1****6****-****C****6)** 

 

The undersigned, a dulyauthorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, as special servicer (the"Special Servicer") herein certifies to the following:

 

1.       All servicing activities and performance of such servicingactivities under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement are performed on behalf ofthe Special Servicer.

 

2.       A review of the servicing activities and performance bythe Special Servicer for the period of January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018(the "Reporting Period"), under the Pooling and Servicing Agreementhas been conducted under my supervision.

 

3.       To the best of my knowledge, based on suchreview, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theterms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in all material respectsthroughout the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure to fulfill anysuch obligations in any material respect, each failure and the nature andstatus thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certified by: /s/ Adam Singer

Adam Singer, ManagingDirector 

 

Date: March 1, 2019
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 129 (Tuesday, July 7, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17862]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y, (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec.  225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has 
determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible 
for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities 
will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than July 20, 1998.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (D. Michael Manies, 
Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 
64198-0001:
    1. BOK Financial Corporation, Tulsa Oklahoma; to acquire Alliance 
Securities Corp., Tulsa, Oklahoma, and thereby indirectly acquire Leo 
Oppenheim & Co., Inc., Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and thereby continue to 
engage in previously authorized underwriting and dealing in, to a 
limited extent, certain municipal revenue bonds,1-4 family mortgage 
related securities, consumer recievable related securities, and 
commercial paper; acting as agent in the private placement of all types 
of securities pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(7)(iii) of Regulation Y, 
providing investment advisory services, pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(6) 
of Regulation Y, underwriting and dealing in bank-eligible securities, 
pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(8)(i), and providing securities brokerage 
services, pursuant to Sec.  225.28(b)(7)(i) of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 30, 1998.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 98-17862 Filed 7-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
No. 11-5150.

#### Steven D. Kiderlen, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 934, 132 S. Ct. 383,

181 L. Ed. 2d 241,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6441.

October 3, 2011.

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

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HEADHUNTER.NET, INC. FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                      16,782,641
<SECURITIES>                                 1,665,191
<RECEIVABLES>                                9,603,685
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,226,932
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,116,844
<PP&E>                                       7,250,160
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,520,143
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             107,823,330
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       23,183,658
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       201,605
<OTHER-SE>                                  84,438,067
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               107,823,330
<SALES>                                     31,157,350
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            31,157,350
<CGS>                                          455,984
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               50,245,415
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (679,375)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              87,403
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (18,864,674)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (18,864,674)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (18,864,674)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (1.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (1.43)


</TABLE>