alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-62,970-06

IN RE MICHAEL DEAN P ERRY, Re lator

ON AP P LICATION FOR AWRIT OF M ANDAM US CAUSE NO. 42,139-A IN THE 188 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM G REGG

COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R

Relator filed a m o t i o n for leave to file a writ of mandamus pursuant to the orig inal jurisdiction of this Court. In it, he contende d that he filed an application for a writ of habea s corpus in the 188 District Court of Gre g g C o u n t y , that more than 35 day s had elapse d, and that the

t h application had not yet bee n forwa rded to this Court. The District Clerk responde d t o this Court’s abate ment order

. Acc ording to the response , Relator filed two 11.07 writ applications on J une 15, 2015. On the State’s motion, the District J udg e signe d an orde r findingthat the writ applications were non-compliant with the Rules of Appe llate Procedur e, and direc ting the District Clerk to return the writ applications to Relator. The District2

Attorney kept a copy of one of the writ applications, but “disca rded the other 800 plus pag es,” as it

was e x pecte d they

would be par

t of a re -filed wr it application. The Rules of Appellate Procedur e, eff ective J anuar

y 1, 2014, state that, “[t] he district cler k of the county of conviction shall acc ept and file all Code o f Criminal Procedur e article 11.07 applications.” T E X . R. A P P . P. 7 3

. 4 (a ) (W est 2016) (ef f. J an. 1, 2014). Rule 73.2, which former ly authorized district cler

ks to return writ applications that wer e not on the form to applicants, now say s that this Court “may dismiss an application that does not comply with these rules.” T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.2 (West 2016) (ef

f. Jan. 1, 2014). The District J udg e’s order contrave ned clearly controlling leg al principles, and caused the Di s t ri ct Clerk to violate her minist eria l duty to file the writ applications and forwa rd them to this Court in acc ordanc e with Chapter 11 of Code o f C ri m i n al Procedur e and Rule of Appellate Procedur e 73. Howe ver, be cause the District Clerk does not ha ve Relator’s writ applications, and the District Attorney has only an incomplete copy of one of the writ applicati o n s , R el at o r has no

reme dy apar

t from re- fil i n g h is writ applications. There fore , his motion for leave to file an application for

a wr it of mandamus is denied. Whil e this mandamus action was pending , Relator f il e d a motion to waive service and sever al motions to supplement. The motions contain many pag es of exhibi ts, which appear to be from or related to his habea s corpus applications. His motions are dismiss ed. All motion exhibi ts shall be returne d to Relator.

Filed: F ebrua

ry 10, 2016 Do not publish
Exhibit 32
                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. 1350,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In  connection  with the Annual Report of AEI  Real  Estate  Fund
XVIII Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-KSB  for
the  period ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  the
undersigned, Robert P. Johnson, President of AEI Fund  Management
XVIII, Inc., the Managing General Partner of the Partnership, and
Patrick  W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer of AEI Fund Management
XVIII,  Inc.,  each  certify, pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  1350,  as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section 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 results of operations of the Partnership.


                            /s/ Robert P Johnson
                                Robert P. Johnson, President
                                AEI Fund Management XVIII, Inc.
                                Managing General Partner
                                March 19, 2004



                            /s/ Patrick W Keene
                                Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer
                                AEI Fund Management XVIII, Inc.
                                Managing General Partner
                                March 19, 2004
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                          Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
VISX, Incorporated:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statement nos.
33-34374, 33-40519, 33-53806, 33-69044, 333-23999, 333-53041, 333-75207, and
333-57524 on Form S-8 of VISX, Incorporated of our report dated January 27, 2004
with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of VISX, Incorporated as of
December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for
the years then ended and the related financial statement schedule, which report
appears in the December 31, 2003 annual report on Form 10-K of VISX,
Incorporated.

Our report refers to our audit of the adjustments that were applied to revise
the 2001 consolidated financial statements, as more fully described in Note 1 to
the consolidated financial statements. However, we were not engaged to audit,
review, or apply any procedures to the 2001 consolidated financial statements
other than with respect to such adjustments.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Mountain View, California
March 12, 2004
EXHIBIT 21.1


                     FIRST CASH FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.
                                 SUBSIDIARIES


                                                               Percentage
                                          Country/State of        Owned
              Subsidiary Name              Incorporation      by Registrant
              ---------------              -------------      -------------
       American Loan and Jewelry, Inc.         Texas               100%
       Famous Pawn, Inc.                       Maryland            100%
       WR Financial, Inc.                      Texas               100%
       Cash & Go, Inc.                         California          100%
       One Iron Ventures, Inc.                 Illinois            100%
       First Cash, S.A. de C.V.                Mexico              100%
       American Loan Employee Services,
         S.A. de C.V.                          Mexico              100%
       First Cash, Ltd.                        Texas               100%
       First Cash Corp.                        Delaware            100%
       First Cash Management, LLC              Delaware            100%
       First Cash, Inc.                        Nevada              100%
       Cash & Go, Ltd.                         Texas               49.5%
       Cash & Go Management, LLC               Texas                50%
       First Cash Credit, Ltd.                 Texas               100%
       First Cash Credit Management, LLC       Texas               100%
       FCFS MO, Inc.                           Missouri            100%
       FCFS OK, Inc.                           Oklahoma            100%
       FCFS SC, Inc.                           South Carolina      100%
       FCFS MI, Inc.                           Michigan            100%
       Guaranteed Auto Finance, Inc.           Arkansas            100%
       SHAC, Inc.                              Arkansas            100%
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000840402
<NAME> PETRO UNION, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> US
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           52879
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   132262
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                185141
<PP&E>                                         4485528
<DEPRECIATION>                                  248261
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 4422408
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           298265
<BONDS>                                          16416
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       2192243
<OTHER-SE>                                  (22686363)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   4422408
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                403968
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   239008
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                314299
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               18898
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (230801)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (230801)
<DISCONTINUED>                              (24092791)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (24323592)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.40)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 99.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

 

 

In connection with thequarterly report on Form 10-QSB of United Wisconsin Grain Producers, LLC (the“Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert J. Miller,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1.                                       The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                       The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Robert J. Miller                  |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Robert J. Miller                      |
|   | Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer |
|   | Dated:  June 26, 2003            |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Yeva Yearusskaya, Appellant, v New York City Transit Authority, Respondent.

[719 NYS2d 282]

In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated December 10, 1999, which denied the application.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the petitioner’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim, as the petitioner did not provide any reasonable excuse for failing to serve a timely notice of claim *(see,*General Municipal Law § 50-e [1] [a]; [5]). The petitioner failed to demonstrate that she was incapacitated to such an extent that she was unable to comply with the statutory notice of claim requirement *(see, Figueroa v City of New York,*92 AD2d 908, 909). Although a police report was filed regarding the accident, it did not constitute actual notice to the respondent of the essential facts constituting the petitioner’s claim *(see, Matter of Dominguez v City of New York,*272 AD2d 326; *Matter of Deegan v City of New York,*227 AD2d 620). Finally, the passage of over five months between the date of the petitioner’s accident and her application to serve a late notice of claim prejudiced the respondent because “it had no opportunity to investigate the transitory condition that allegedly precipitated the claimant’s fall” *(Doherty v City of New York,*251 AD2d 368, 369). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

____________________

No. 99-1429

DWIGHT W. MATTIS,

Petitioner, Appellant,

v.

JANET RENO, ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL.,

Respondents, Appellees.

____________________

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on May 8, 2000, is amended as

follows:

1) On page 9 n.9, line 4, delete:

"It is worth noting" 

 and replace it with:

"It is arguable"

2) On page 9 n.9, at the end of the footnote, add:

"We do not decide the question."

3) On page 21, line 17, delete:

", for two reasons"

4) On page 21, line 18, between "First," and "Mattis" 

insert:
"there is a strong argument that"

5) On page 22, line 17, at the end, add:

"But we need not ultimately decide the waiver question

because the reasons expressed below resolve the matter

against Mattis."

6) On page 22, line 18, delete:

"In addition," 

 and change "there" to "There"
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Ryan W. SASSE, Appellant.

No. ED 105938

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

Filed: September 18, 2018

Irene C. Karns, 503 E. Nifong, #212, Columbia, MO. 65201, for appellant.

Robert J. Bartholomew, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, MO. 65102, for respondent.

Before Roy L. Richter, P.J., Robert M. Clayton III, J., Angela T. Quigless, J.

***ORDER***

PER CURIAM.

Ryan W. Sasse ("Sasse") appeals the judgment of the trial court following a jury trial in which he was convicted of one count of second-degree assault and an associated count of armed criminal action. On appeal, Sasse argues there was insufficient evidence presented to support his conviction of second-degree assault for repeatedly striking Victim with a metal pole, as alleged in the indictment and specified in the verdict director, because there was no evidence that Sasse hit Victim more *675than once. Sasse also argues the trial court erred in overruling his motion for judgment of acquittal as to his conviction of armed criminal action because the conviction was dependent upon the jury's finding of guilt on the charge of second-degree assault, which was not supported by sufficient evidence. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal, and we find the trial court did not clearly err. An extended opinion would have no jurisprudential purpose. We have, however, provided a memorandum setting forth the reasons for our decision to the parties for their use only. We affirm the judgment pursuant to MO. R. CIV. P. 84.16(b) (2018).
Exhibit 31.2 

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Patricia G. Kriss, Chief Financial Officer of Entropin, Inc., certify that: 

 

1.    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Entropin, Inc.; 

 

2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.    Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.    The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

 

(a)    Designed such disclosure controlsand 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 withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

(b)    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation ; and 

 

(c)    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover 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 

 

5.    The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a)    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b)    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Ronald Mustari, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) of Whitehall Limited,
Inc. certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Whitehall Limited, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my
knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and
procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the 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) 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; and

c) 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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants control over financial reporting; and

5. The
registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or
persons performing the equivalent function):

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; and

b) 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.

Date: April 18, 2006



/s/ Ronald MustariRonald Mustari, President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF INTERIM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended
March 31, 2010, I, Andrew J. Ryback, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  1)
    
    such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months ended March 31,
2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
three months ended March 31, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Plumas Bancorp. Date:
April 28, 2010
    
    /s/ Andrew J. RybackAndrew J. Ryback, Interim Chief Executive Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6213** 

LEON L. BAXTER , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Anthony John Trenga , District Judge. ( 1:11

- cv - 01259

- AJT

- IDD )

Submi t ted : May 24, 2012 Decided: May 30, 2012

Before MOTZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Leon L. Baxter, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Leon L. Baxter seek s to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1) (A) (2006) . A certificate of a ppealability 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 ju rists 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 proced ural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the r ecord and conclude that Baxter has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contention s are adequately3 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED