alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 99.5**

**Section 906 Certification**

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 Annual Report on Form 40-F of Ballard Power Systems Inc., a corporation organized under the laws of Canada (the “Company”), for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies pursuant to 18        U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002: 

1.   the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); 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:  March 20, 2009  | /s/ John Sheridan                              |   |
|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                   | John Sheridan                                  |
|                                   | President and Chief Executive Officer               |
|                              |
|                              |
| Dated:   March 20, 2009      | /s/ Jay Murray                                 |   |
|                                   | Jay Murray                                     |
|                                   | Controller and acting Chief Financial Officer  |

 

----
Anthony TURNER and Susan Turner, Appellants, v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP., Appellee.

No. 4D14-535

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

December 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 60 (Tuesday, March 31, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 14589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7130]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-64,959]


Emerson Network Power--Embedded Computing Division, a Subsidiary 
of Emerson Electric; Marlborough, MA; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated on January 22, 2009 in response to a 
petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Emerson 
Network Power--Embedded Computing Division, a subsidiary of Emerson 
Electric, Marlborough, Massachusetts.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Therefore, the investigation under this petition has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of March, 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E9-7130 Filed 3-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
Exhibit 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF TPC GROUP INC.



|1. | TPC Group LLC, a Texas limited liability company
|-- | ------------------------------------------------



|2. | TP Capital Corporation, a Delaware corporation
|-- | ----------------------------------------------



|3. | Texas Butylene Chemical Corporation, a Texas corporation
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------



|4. | Texas Olefins Domestic International Sales Corporation, a Texas corporation
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------



|5. | Port Neches Fuels LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------



|6. | Texas Petrochemicals Netherlands B.V., a Netherlands private company with limited liability
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrence RIDGEWAY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D16-2660

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed September 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 37665

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

DEVON BLAKE ELMORE,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2011 Unpublished Opinion No. 372

Filed: March 1, 2011

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED

OPINION AND SHALL NOT

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Cheri C. Copsey, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of five years, with a minimum 

period of confinement of two years, for aggravated assault, affirmed.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Diane M. Walker, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy 

Attorney General, Boise, for respondent. 

______________________________________________

Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Devon Blake Elmore was found guilty of aggravated assault. I.C. §§ 18-901(1), 18-

905(B), 18-204. The district court sentenced Elmore to a unified term of five years, with a 

minimum period of confinement of two years. Elmore appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court's discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 
2

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Elmore’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

OMAR DOMINGUEZ-VALENCIA, 

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-50531 

D.C. No. 3:15-cr-02064-BTM

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Barry Ted Moskowitz, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 26, 2017**

Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

Omar Dominguez-Valencia appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges his guilty-plea conviction for attempted reentry of a removed alien, in 

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and 

we affirm.

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

SEP 29 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 15-50531 

Dominguez-Valencia contends that his underlying removal order, which was 

based on his conviction for burglary in violation of California Penal Code § 459, is 

invalid in light of this court’s decision in Dimaya v. Lynch, 803 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 

2015), cert. granted, 137 S. Ct. 31 (2016). Regardless of the merits of this 

contention, by entering an unconditional guilty plea, Dominguez-Valencia waived 

his right to challenge the validity of the underlying removal order. See Tollett v. 

Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973).

Dominguez-Valencia’s unopposed motion to take judicial notice is granted.

AFFIRMED.
Shaunte CAMPBELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D16-3599

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed October 31, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 13.1
  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 Konsta Real Estate Properties Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Roman Plavnik, President and Chief Executive 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:
 
 (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: August 31, 2010
 
  /s/ Roman Plavnik
 
 Roman Plavnik
 President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)
-78.0 -77.5 -77.0 -76.5 -76.0

38.0 38.5 39.0 

### ★

▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000

18 12 06 00 07/20 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 20 Jul 06

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
# :1:AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION®

,.. IN GEORGIA 

## TESTIMONY PROVIDED BY: JUNE DEEN SeniorVice President of Public Policyand Health Promotionsforthe American Lung Association in Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina RE: U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING ATLANTA, GA,AUGUST 29, 2014 CLEAN POWER PLAN PROPOSED RULE My name is June Deen, I am the SeniorVice President of Public Policy and Health Promotions fortheAmerican Lung Association in Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. Thank you for providing an opportunityfor me to speak. As many ofyou know, the Lung Association's mission is to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease. The American Lung Association believes that we need strong carbon standardsto protectthe lung health ofeveryone, especially those who sufferfrom lung disease. Carbon pollution leads to warmertemperatures that can enhance the conditions for harmful air pollutants, including ozone and particle pollution. Scientists warn that climate change is likelyto increase the risk of unhealthy air in large parts ofthe United States, leading to more unhealthy airdays than we would have otherwise. More pollution means more childhood asthma attacks and complications forthose with lung disease, including increased risk of premature death. Air pollution also affects people with cardiovascular diseases, diabetics, and low income families. Children growing up where ozone levels are high may risk having lung diseases later in life. Furtherwest, we already see the effects ofdevastating droughtfrom the changes in weather patterns and the heat. The droughtthreatens human health in many ways. Wildfires and dust storms blowfine particles that people inhale deep into their lungs, triggering asthma attacks and heartattacks, and can even shorten their lives. People do their bestto prepare forthese events and to protectthemselves. Butwe really need to preventthe problems in the first place, by reducing the carbon pollution that is changing the earth's climate.We are committed to fighting carbon pollution because it helps us save lives and improve lung health. Ifwe follow the steps outlined in the Clean Power Plan, we can prevent up to 4,100 deaths in 2020-and more each year afterthat, avoiding upto 6,600 premature deaths in 2030 when all the steps are in place. We can prevent upto 100,000childhood asthma attacks in 2020, rising to prevent upto 150,000attacks ten years later. We need to have a strong Clean Power Plan in place to cut carbon pollution and lessen the burdens on the health of millions ofAmericans. We urge EPA to adopt standardsthat will ensure we do as much as we can to fightthese threats and protect public health. Thankyou June Deen SeniorVice President of Public Policy and Health Promotions American Lung Association in Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina 2452 Spring Rd 

## I Smyrna, GA 30080 

### 0: 770-544-0520 

## I C: 404-550-4956 

## I F: 770-319-0349 June.Deen@lungse.org
Xiomara I. LOPEZ, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-1603

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 2, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
# Eiropas Savienības C 447I/2020

| | ISSN 1977-0952 |
| --- | --- |
| Eiropas Savienības
  Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 447I |
| | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi | 63. gadagājums2020. gada 24. decembris |

ISSN 1977-0952

Eiropas Savienības

Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 447I

Izdevums latviešu valodā

Informācija un paziņojumi

63. gadagājums2020. gada 24. decembris

---

| Saturs | Lappuse |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Paziņojumi |
| | EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI |
| | Eiropas Komisija |
| 2020/C 447 I/01 | Eiropas Savienības lēmumu kopsavilkums par zāļu tirdzniecības atļaujām no 21 December 2020 līdz 21 December 2020( OV C 136, 30.4.2004. ) | 1 |

Saturs

Lappuse

IV   Paziņojumi

EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI

Eiropas Komisija

2020/C 447 I/01

Eiropas Savienības lēmumu kopsavilkums par zāļu tirdzniecības atļaujām no 21 December 2020 līdz 21 December 2020( OV C 136, 30.4.2004. )

( OV C 136, 30.4.2004. )

1

---

| LV | |
| --- | --- |

LV

---

IV Paziņojumi

EIROPAS SAVIENĪBAS IESTĀŽU UN STRUKTŪRU SNIEGTI PAZIŅOJUMI

Eiropas Komisija

| 24.12.2020 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | CI 447/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2020

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

CI 447/1

---

Eiropas Savienības lēmumu kopsavilkums par zāļu tirdzniecības atļaujām no 21 December 2020 līdz 21 December 2020

(publicēts saskaņā ar 13. vai 38. pantu Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Regulā (EK) Nr. 726/2004 (1))

(2020/C 447 I/01)

| — | Tirdzniecības atļaujas izsniegšana (13. pants Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Regulā (EK) Nr. 726/2004): Pieņemtas |
| --- | --- |

—

Tirdzniecības atļaujas izsniegšana (13. pants Eiropas Parlamenta un Padomes Regulā (EK) Nr. 726/2004): Pieņemtas

| Lēmuma datums | Zāļu nosaukums | INN (starptautiskais nepatentētais nosaukums) | Tirdzniecības atļaujas turētājs | Ieraksta numurs Kopienas reģistrā | Farmaceitiskā forma | AĶT kods (Anatomiski ķīmiski terapeitiskais kods) | Paziņojuma datums |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 21.12.2020 | Comirnaty | COVID 19 mRNS vakcīna (modificētu nukleozīdu) | BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH An der Goldgrube 12, 55131 Mainz, Deutschland | EU/1/20/1528 | Koncentrāts injekciju dispersijas pagatavošanai | J07BX | 21.12.2020 |

Lēmuma datums

Zāļu nosaukums

INN (starptautiskais nepatentētais nosaukums)

Tirdzniecības atļaujas turētājs

Ieraksta numurs Kopienas reģistrā

Farmaceitiskā forma

AĶT kods (Anatomiski ķīmiski terapeitiskais kods)

Paziņojuma datums

21.12.2020

Comirnaty

COVID 19 mRNS vakcīna (modificētu nukleozīdu)

BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH An der Goldgrube 12, 55131 Mainz, Deutschland

EU/1/20/1528

Koncentrāts injekciju dispersijas pagatavošanai

J07BX

21.12.2020

Ikvienam, kurš vēlas apskatīt publisko novērtējuma ziņojumu par attiecīgajām zālēm un ar tām saistītos lēmumus, jāsazinās ar:

| European Medicines Agency |
| --- |
| Domenico Scarlattilaan 6 |
| 1083 HS Amsterdam |
| NETHERLANDS |

European Medicines Agency

Domenico Scarlattilaan 6

1083 HS Amsterdam

NETHERLANDS

---

(1)  OV L 136, 30.4.2004, 1. lpp.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-10748

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CHARLES EARL DAVIS,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:17-CR-10-1

Before DENNIS, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Charles Earl Davis appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty 

plea conviction for possession with intent to distribute a mixture and substance 

containing methamphetamine and being a felon in possession of a firearm. He 

argues that the district court erred by not ordering his sentence to run 

concurrently with any sentence imposed for two pending state charges arising 

from a prior arrest, which he asserts are relevant conduct to his instant offense.

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 30, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-10748 Document: 00514936761 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/30/2019
No. 18-10748

2

Davis’s unpreserved arguments challenging the consecutiveness of his 

sentence under U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3 raise fact questions pertaining to whether the 

conduct underlying his previous arrest was sufficiently connected or related to 

the underlying offense to qualify as relevant conduct under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3. 

“Questions of fact capable of resolution by the district court upon proper 

objection at sentencing can never constitute plain error.” United States v. 

Lopez, 923 F.2d 47, 50 (5th Cir. 1991) (per curiam); see also United States v. 

Vital, 68 F.3d 114, 118-19 (5th Cir. 1995).

Further, Davis’s argument that United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725

(1993), and United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc), 

abrogated on other grounds by Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 468 

(1997), which addressed legal error, dictate that we not follow Lopez is 

unpersuasive. He effectively asks us to overturn this court’s precedent, which 

we may not do. See United States v. Walker, 302 F.3d 322, 324-25 (5th Cir. 

2002). To the extent Davis relies on decisions that conflict with Lopez, we 

follow Lopez because it is the earlier line of precedent. See United States v. 

Wheeler, 322 F.3d 823, 828 n.1 (5th Cir. 2003).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 18-10748 Document: 00514936761 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/30/2019
[No. 27665-8-II.

Division Two.

May 25, 2004.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Brent J. Rosie, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Thurston County, No. 01-1-00318-0, Wm. Thomas McPhee, J., entered August 3, 2001. *Affirmed in part*and *remanded*by unpublished opinion per Armstrong, J., concurred in by Quinn-Brintnall, C.J., and Morgan, J.
exv10w13



 





Exhibit 10.13




10. CONSENT TO SERVE:





I hereby consent to being named as a Director in a registration statement filed by the
Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission.



* * *





I agree to notify the Company immediately on becoming aware of any changes in the foregoing
information and will endeavor to do so prior to my, any of my immediate family members or any
of my affiliates under my control directly or indirectly entering into any Relationship or
transaction that would require an affirmative response to any of the foregoing questions in
the future.



	 	 	 
	Dated October 29, 2007

	 	/s/ Charles E. Schalliol
	 

	 	 
	 

	 	Signature of Director or Officer
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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Cosi, Inc. (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 28, 2004, of
the Company, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-Q
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.


/s/ Kevin Armstrong
------------------------
Kevin Armstrong
Chief Executive Officer
August 11, 2004


                                       25
<PAGE>

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Daleco Resources Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 (the "Report"),
I, Alfonso Knoll, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

       (3)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
             15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                             /s/ Alfonso Knoll
                                         -----------------------
                                         Alfonso Knoll
                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                         May 13, 2005


                                      -45-
Ronald Palmer HEATH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. SC17-1808

Supreme Court of Florida.

[February 28, 2018]

Billy H. Nolas, Chief, Capital Habeas Unit, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee, Florida; and Sonya Rudenstine, Gainesville, Florida, for Appellant

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer A. Donahue, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellee

PER CURIAM.

We have for review Ronald Palmer Heath's appeal of the circuit court's order denying Heath's motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. This Court has jurisdiction. *See* art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.

Heath's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in *Hurst v. Florida* , --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 616, 193 L.Ed.2d 504 (2016), and our decision on remand in *Hurst v. State* (*Hurst* ), 202 So.3d 40 (Fla. 2016), *cert. denied* , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 2161, 198 L.Ed.2d 246 (2017). After this Court decided *Hitchcock v. State* , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla.), *932*cert. denied* , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Heath responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why *Hitchcock* should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Heath's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Heath is not entitled to relief. Heath was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of ten to two. *Heath v. State* , 648 So.2d 660, 663 (Fla. 1994). Heath's sentence of death became final in 1995. *Heath v. Florida* , 515 U.S. 1162, 115 S.Ct. 2618, 132 L.Ed.2d 860 (1995). Thus, *Hurst* does not apply retroactively to Heath's sentence of death. *See**Hitchcock* , 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Heath's motion.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Heath, we caution that any rehearing motion containing reargument will be stricken. It is so ordered.

LABARGA, C.J., and QUINCE, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

PARIENTE, J., concurs in result with an opinion.

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

PARIENTE, J., concurring in result.

I concur in result because I recognize that this Court's opinion in *Hitchcock v. State* , 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), *cert. denied* , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), is now final. However, I continue to adhere to the views expressed in my dissenting opinion in *Hitchcock* .