alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### State of West Virginia *v.*Bob Phillips

(No. 7039)

Submitted February 9, 1932.

Decided February 16, 1932.

*526
      *Arthur G. Froe*and *Leon*P. *Miller,*for plaintiff in error.

*Howard B. Lee,*Attorney General, and *B. A. Blessing,*Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Hatotier, PeesideNT:

Bob Phillips was convicted upon an indictment charging him, Will Miller and Thomas McKinney with stealing $1,500. 00 from Lrvia Lawlah.

Several errors are alleged, but each one is predicated upon the theory that the evidence for the state shows the money was taken at Gary while Phillips was in Welch, and therefore that Phillips was not constructively present, was at most a mere accessory to the crime, and cannot be convicted as a principal. TIis counsel make the following statement upon which they found their argument: “The evidence on behalf of the state shows that Livia Lawlah, prosecuting witness, was the victim of a ‘skin game.’ The evidence of the state shows that Phillips had a hand in the affair only to the extent at most, of aiding the actual perpetrators in the preparing of papers with which to work the trick; in arranging for transportation to Welch, and in accompanying them to Welch; and that he shared in the ill-gotten proceeds. All of this evidence is vehemently denied by the defendant, but the jury’s verdict requires us to assume that all of this is true. Disregarding Phillips’ denial, however, the State’s evidence discloses that Phillips was not present when the money was taken, but was in Welch, the money having been paid over at Gary, West Virginia, six miles away.”

The record shows that counsel for Phillips are in error in assuming that the money was delivered in Gary. Both Mrs. Lawlah and McKinney testified that she went to Gary for the money in company with Miller, while McKinney waited in Welch, and that upon her return to Welch, she then delivered the money to McKinney. It is true that she *527never even saw Phillips; but he was waiting with an automobile in Welch while the scheme to secure her money was being worked and he left Welch with McKinney as soon as he obtained possession of the money.

The place where the money was delivered, however, is of minor importance on this question. In *State*v. *Powers,*91 W. Va. 737, 746, 113 S. E. 912, Judge Lively demonstrates conclusively that where several persons engage in a common criminal design, and each takes the part assigned to him, each is a principal, whether immediately present when the crime is actually committed.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

*Affirmed.*
**Docket Number FAA -**  **2014 -**  **0258**
**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 Bakers Footwear Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-Q for the period ended November 3, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, Peter A. Edison, Chairman of the Board and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title18 of the United States Code, 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 theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Date: December 18, 2007 /s/ Peter A. Edison   Peter A. Edison   Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and PresidentBakers Footwear Group, Inc.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

______________________

NO. 09-19-00347-CR

______________________

CESAR ANTONIO SERMENO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 397th District Court

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 069462

_________________________________________________________________

ORDER

Appellant’s counsel filed a motion to withdraw supported by a brief 

concluding that the instant appeal is frivolous. See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 

738, 744 (1967). Appellant’s counsel certified that counsel provided copies of the 

motion and brief to appellant, advised appellant of appellant’s right to examine the 

appellate record and file a pro se response, and supplied appellant with a form motion 

for pro se access to the appellate record. See Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313, 319-20 

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014). This Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment on November 
2

18, 2020. See Sermeno v. State, No. 09-19-00347-CR, 2020 WL 6749937, at *1 

(Tex. App.—Beaumont Nov. 18. 2020, no pet. h.) (mem. op., not designated for 

publication). The Court of Criminal Appeals granted an extension of time to file a 

petition for discretionary review until February 16, 2021.

On January 25, 2020, appellant requested access to the appellate record with 

this Court. We hereby direct the clerk of the trial court to provide access to a paper 

copy of the reporter’s record and clerk’s record to appellant, and to provide written 

verification to this Court of the date and manner in which the appellate record was 

provided, on or before Monday, March 1, 2021. See Kelly, 436 S.W.3d at 321-22. 

Any additional extensions of time to file a petition for discretionary review must be 

requested from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 68.2(c).

ORDER ENTERED January 29, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
TOWN OF NAGS HEAD v. William W. RICHARDSON and wife, Martha W. Richardson

No. 244A18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Filed June 14, 2019

Hornthal, Riley, Ellis & Maland, L.L.P., Elizabeth City, by Benjamin M. Gallop and M.H. Hood Ellis, for plaintiff-appellant/appellee.

Nexsen Pruet, PLLC, Raleigh, by David P. Ferrell and Norman W. Shearin, for defendant-appellants/appellees.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the majority opinion, this Court affirms the decision of the Court of Appeals. Further, to clarify the remand order, the sole issue on remand is the fair market value of the easement or, as presented to the jury, "What was the fair market value of the 10-year beach nourishment easement on the Richardsons' property taken by the Town of Nags Head at the time of taking?". *See* N.C.G.S. § 40A-64(b)(ii) (2017) ("If there is a taking of less than the entire tract, the measure of compensation is ... the fair market value of the property taken.").

AFFIRMED.

Justice DAVIS did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
EXHIBIT 21.1


                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES


GREKA Energy Corporation, a Colorado Corporation                6/27/88

Greka AM, Inc., a Colorado Corporation                          9/30/99
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA)

Greka Integrated, Inc, a Colorado Corporation                   3/23/99
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA)

Santa Maria Refining Company, a California                      8/23/93
Corporation (wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA
Integrated, Inc.)

Greka Realty, Inc., a California Corporation                    8/3/94
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA Integrated, Inc.)

Greka SMV, Inc, a Colorado Corporation                          10/9/97
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA
Integrated, Inc.)

Greka CA, Inc., a Colorado corporation                          2/14/02
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA)

Windsor Energy US Corporation, a Delaware corporation           3/24/95
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA)

Rincon Island Limited Partnership, a Texas                      9/7/95
limited partnership (wholly owned by Greka CA, Inc.
and Windsor Energy US Corporation)

Calox, Inc., an Indiana Corporation                             6/10/92
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA)

Grecogas Limited, a Cayman Islands Corporation                  6/19/97
(wholly owned subsidiary of Greka)

Greka Energy (International) B.V., a Dutch Corporation          3/22/01
(wholly owned subsidiary of Grecogas Limited)

Greka Jatiluhur Limited, a Cayman Islands Corporation           6/19/97
(wholly owned subsidiary of Greka)

Greka Energy (Colombia) B.V., a Dutch Corporation               6/21/00
(wholly owned subsidiary of Greka)

Saba Petroleum Company, a Delaware Corporation                  3/16/79
(wholly owned subsidiary of GREKA)

Saba Petroleum Inc, a California Corporation                    2/3/92
(wholly owned subsidiary of Saba Petroleum Company)

Saba Exploration Company, a California Corporation              5/4/95
(wholly owned subsidiary of Saba Petroleum Company)

Saba International Limited, a Delaware Corporation              1/2/96
(wholly owned subsidiary of Saba Petroleum Company)

Saba Petroleum of Michigan, Inc, a Michigan Corporation         11/4/92
(wholly owned subsidiary of Saba Petroleum Company)

Saba Energy of Texas, Inc, a Texas Corporation                  6/3/88
(wholly owned subsidiary of Saba Petroleum Company)
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12383-12384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6306]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,390]


Janesville Acoustics; Norwalk, OH; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on February 26, 2009 in response to a 
petition filed by Chicago Midwest Regional Joint Board on behalf of the 
workers of Janesville Acoustics, Norwalk, Ohio.
    The petitioning group of workers is covered by an earlier petition 
(TA-W-65,077) filed on January 27, 2009 that is

[[Page 12384]]

the subject of an ongoing investigation for which a determination has 
not yet been issued. Further investigation in this case would duplicate 
efforts and serve no purpose; therefore the investigation under this 
petition has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of March 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-6306 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 99.2 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)



                        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 World Information Technolgoy, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report").
I, Hsueh-Chu Lin, Chief Executive Officer (or Chief Financial Officer) of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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
              result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Hsueh-Chu Lin
-----------------------------
    Hsueh-Chu Lin
    Chief Executive Officer


Date  May 15, 2003
      ------------


<PAGE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Uni-Pixel, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe quarter ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Reed J. Killion, ChiefExecutive Officer, President and Principal Executive Officer of the Company,hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

·                  The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

·                  The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| Date:  August 14,  2009 | By:   | /s/ Reed J. Killion                                                                  |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                   |            | Reed J. Killion, Chief  Executive Officer, President and Principal Executive Officer |

 

*A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 hasbeen provided to Uni-Pixel, Inc. and will be retained by Uni-Pixel, Inc.and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.  The foregoing certification isbeing furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and shall not bedeemed  filed by the Company for purposesof Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.*

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 96-4045

RAYMOND LEE PRAYEAR, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling.

Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Chief District Judge.

(CR-94-102)

Submitted: August 22, 1996

Decided: September 12, 1996

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Howard G. Higgins, Jr., Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellant.

William D. Wilmoth, United States Attorney, Sam G. Nazzaro, Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Raymond Lee Prayear, Jr., pled guilty to conspiracy to possess

crack cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.A.§ 846 (West

Supp. 1996). He was sentenced to a term of 151 months imprisonment. He appeals his sentence on two grounds which were not raised

in the district court and are without merit. Finding no plain error, we

affirm his sentence.

Prayear first contends that his sentence is disproportionate to the

gravity of his offense and thus violates the Eighth Amendment.

Because his sentence is less than life without parole, an extended proportionality review is not necessary. United States v. Thomas, 900

F.2d 37, 39 (4th Cir. 1990). We have no difficulty in finding that Prayear's sentence is not disproportionate to his offense.

Next, Prayear argues that the 100-to-1 statutory sentencing ratio for

cocaine and crack offenses violates the Equal Protection Clause of the

Fifth Amendment because of its disparate impact on black defendants.

This claim has been considered and rejected before. United States v.

Fisher, 58 F.3d 96, 99 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 64

U.S.L.W. 3270 (U.S. Oct. 10, 1995) (No. 95-5923).

The sentence is accordingly affirmed. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented

in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 2
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TOTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATES, LLC a/a/o MICHELINE CINEUS,

Appellant,

v.

GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1580

________________________

ADVANCED DIAGNOSTIC GROUP a/a/o PATTAMA BAILEY, 

Appellant,

v.

GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1601

________________________

ADVANCED DIAGNOSTIC GROUP a/a/o ASHLEY BECKHAM,

Appellant,

v.

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D21-1641

[July 14, 2021]

Consolidated appeal of nonfinal orders from the County Court for the 

Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; John D. Fry, Judge; L.T. 

Case Nos. CONO20-14419, CONO20-014099 and CONO20-014238 (70).
2

Chad A. Barr of Chad Barr Law, Altamonte Springs, for appellants.

Michael C. Clarke of Kubicki Draper, P.A., Tampa, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

In these three consolidated cases, the county court sua sponte entered 

orders transferring venue without any showing that plaintiffs’ chosen 

venue was improper or that transfer was appropriate on forum non 

conveniens grounds. We issued orders in all three cases directing the 

parties to show cause why these cases are not controlled by Advanced 

Diagnostic Group v. Ocean Harbor Casualty Insurance Co., No. 4D21-458, 

2021 WL 1310851 (Fla. 4th DCA Apr. 8, 2021), where this Court recently 

reversed a group of similar orders. Having considered the responses and 

replies, we conclude that these cases are controlled by our recent decision 

in Advanced Diagnostic. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further 

proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 55 (Tuesday, March 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 12384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-6296]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,193]


Prime Tanning Company, Hartland, ME; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended, an investigation was initiated on February 9, 2009 in response 
to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Prime 
Tanning Company, Hartland, Maine.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 13th day of March, 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-6296 Filed 3-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Emmit James DORSEY, Appellant.

WD 81239

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

ORDER FILED: March 12, 2019

Robert J. Bartholomew, Jr., Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Britteny D. Pfleger, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.

Before Division Two: Cynthia L. Martin, Presiding Judge, Alok Ahuja, Judge and Gary D. Witt, Judge

**ORDER**

Per curiam:

Emmit Dorsey ("Dorsey") appeals a Cole County Circuit Court conviction by a jury for three counts of the class C felony forgery. Pursuant to the jury's recommendation, Dorsey was sentenced to one day for Count I, four days for Count II, and three years for Count III. However, the trial court suspended the execution of Dorsey's sentence and he was placed on supervised probation for five years and ordered to pay restitution in the sum of $10,000 during the period of probation. For reasons explained more fully in a memorandum provided to the parties, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).1

1

This Court wants to express our gratitude to Polsinelli PC for representing this indigent appellant in this case *pro bono* and graciously assisting in the administration of justice. Such work greatly contributes to the legal community as well as the community at large.
Presidential Documents

1583 

Federal Register 

Vol. 74, No. 8 

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 

Title 3— 

The President 

Presidential Determination No. 2009–10 of January 1, 2009 

Waiver of Reimbursement Under the United Nations Participation Act to Support the United Nations/African Union Mission in Darfur 

Memorandum for the Secretary of State 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the 

laws of the United States of America, including section 10(d)(1) of the 

United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as amended (22 U.S.C. 287e– 

2(d)(1)), I hereby determine that provision of assistance to the United Nations/ 

African Union Mission in Darfur to support the airlift of equipment for 

peacekeeping in Darfur without reimbursement from the United Nations 

is important to the security interests of the United States. 

You are authorized and directed to report this determination to the Congress 

and to arrange for its publication in the Federal Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, January 1, 2009 

[FR Doc. E9–598 

Filed 1–12–09; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 4710–10–P 


GWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
Exhibit 32  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Goldcorp Holdings Co., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does hereby certify, to the best of his knowledge, that:  1.     The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008 (the "Report") of the Company complies in all material respects with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  2.     The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  /s/ Pierre Quilliam  Pierre Quilliam, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  Date:  July 14, 2009
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-65,176]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 9, 2009 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Hewlett Packard, Personal Laser Solutions Division, Boise, Idaho.

The petitioners have requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of March 2009.

Richard Church,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-5909 Filed 3-18-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P