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

13

- 23

- 00485

- CR

Robert Ernest Moreno v. The State of Texas
On Appeal from the 36th District Court of Aransas County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. A

- 22

- 5177

- CR

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considere d this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed

. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. July 25 , 2024
Daren Androplis RILEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D16-3900

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 11, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
|   | (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      12, 2010 | /s/ Richard B. Stern         |
|----------------------------------------|------------------------------|
|                                   | Richard      B. Stern        |
|                                   | Chief      Executive Officer |

----
1The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Southern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-3234

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Southern District of Iowa.

Jesus Solis-Chavez, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: August 30, 2000

 Filed: September 12, 2000

___________

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jesus Solis-Chavez, a Mexican citizen, pleaded guilty to illegal re-entry

following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) (1999). The

District Court1 sentenced him to 86 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised

release, and Solis-Chavez appeals. Appointed counsel has filed a brief under Anders

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Solis-Chavez has not filed a supplemental brief.
-2-

Counsel argues the District Court erred by not departing downward based on

Solis-Chavez’s arguments at sentencing that (1) he would be subject to disparate

treatment in prison because he was an illegal alien, (2) he was culturally assimilated

into the United States, and (3) his criminal history category overstated the seriousness

of his past conduct. Counsel does not argue that the District Court believed it was

without authority to depart, had an unconstitutional motive, or purposefully imposed

a harsher sentence because Solis-Chavez was an alien. In fact, the District Court

indicated that consideration of the first two grounds for departure led it to impose a

lower sentence than it was otherwise inclined to do. See United States v. Navarro, 218

F.3d 895, 897-98 (8th Cir. 2000) (discretionary decision not to depart from the

guidelines based on deportable-alien status was unreviewable on appeal absent

unconstitutional motive or court’s legally erroneous conclusion that it lacked authority

to consider this ground as mitigating factor). The District Court specifically rejected

the third ground for departure, noting Solis-Chavez had more than the minimum points

required for Category VI, and his antisocial criminal behavior had occurred almost

annually. See United States v. Hall, 7 F.3d 1394, 1396 (8th Cir. 1993) (this Court will

not review sentencing court’s decision not to depart downward for overstated criminal

history when it was aware of its authority to do so). We thus find the District Court’s

refusal to depart to be an unreviewable exercise of discretion.

After conducting the record review required under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues.

Accordingly, we affirm. 

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Antonio RUSSELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D17-2176

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 29, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-29-1999
<CASH>                                       4,344,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,524,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  2,936,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            16,044,000
<PP&E>                                      86,885,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             310,954,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       45,762,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       276,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 145,206,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               310,954,000
<SALES>                                     89,429,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                       25,464,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               25,464,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            56,353,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,030,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,983,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,094,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,889,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,889,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .16
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0042

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JONATHAN ALBERT BERTSCH,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including January 18, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 12 2022

12/12/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0042
Brian TORRES, Sr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2077

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 25, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
EX PARTE Glen D. JOHNSON

CR-15-1413

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

November 9, 2016

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Jefferson Cir. Ct.
EXHIBIT 32
                                  CERTIFICATION
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Essense Water, Inc. (the
"Company") for the year ended August 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Kevin Nichols, as
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.


Date: December 3, 2010                By: /s/ Kevin Nichols
                                          -----------------
                                              Kevin Nichols
                                              Chief Executive Officer
                                              Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes
of ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 32.2

                            MAXUS REALTY TRUST, INC.

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Maxus  Realty  Trust,  Inc.  (the
"Trust")  on Form  10-QSB for the period  ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John W.
Alvey,  Vice  President,  Chief  Financial and Accounting  Officer of the Trust,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

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

         (2) The  information  contained  in  the Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Trust as of June 30, 2003 (the last date of the period covered by the Report).


/s/ John W. Alvey
-----------------------
John W. Alvey
Vice President
Chief Financial & Accounting Officer
August 11, 2003
H. Res. 908 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 5, 2023. 

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is 

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY: Mr. Armstrong. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Deryck Lee KATWAROO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-2088

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed February 2, 2018

Deryck Lee Katwaroo, Okeechobee, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carmen F. Corrente, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PALMER, J.

Deryck Lee Katwaroo (the defendant) appeals the trial court's order granting in *447part and denying in part his "motion to review the sentence imposed on a juvenile offender for possible modification or reduction of sentence," filed pursuant to rule 3.802 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. The trial court correctly denied the motion as it was premature; however, the trial court erred in amending the defendant's sentence to provide for a review hearing without first conducting a resentencing hearing. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court to treat the motion as a rule 3.800(a) motion and set this matter for resentencing.

In 1999, the defendant pled guilty to the offense of second-degree murder. We affirmed his judgment and 30-year sentence. *Katwaroo v. State*, 756 So.2d 254 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

The defendant filed this rule 3.802 motion alleging that his sentence is illegal because, according to him, he was sixteen at the time he committed the offense. *See* *Miller v. Alabama*, 567 U.S. 460, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012) ; *Graham v. Florida*, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010) ; *Kelsey v. State*, 206 So.3d 5 (Fla. 2016) ; *Atwell v. State*, 197 So.3d 1040 (Fla 2016). Procedurally, the defendant sought relief under the wrong rule because rule 3.802 applies only after a juvenile has been resentenced pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes, and the time for a review hearing has arrived.

Nevertheless, in light of his 30-year sentence, the defendant was entitled to receive judicial review of his sentence. *See* *Burrows v. State*, 219 So.3d 910 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017), *but see* *Davis v. State*, 214 So.3d 799 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). However, it was error for the trial court to amend the sentence to provide for a review hearing without first conducting a resentencing hearing. *Davis v. State*, 230 So.3d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to treat the instant motion as a rule 3.800(a) motion and to hold a resentencing hearing pursuant to section 921.1402, Florida Statutes.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

EVANDER, J. concurs

BERGER, J. concurring specially

BERGER, J., concurring specially.

I concur based on this court's decision in *Davis v. State*, 230 So.3d 487, 488 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). However, were I writing on a clean slate, I would affirm. In my view, Katwaroo is not entitled to resentencing under *Graham v. Florida*, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S.Ct. 2011, 176 L.Ed.2d 825 (2010) or *Miller v. Alabama*, 567 U.S. 460, 132 S.Ct. 2455, 183 L.Ed.2d 407 (2012), because his thirty-year sentence is not a de facto life sentence. *See* *Davis v. State*, 214 So.3d 799, 799-800 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Soto, Appellant.

[719 NYS2d 603]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered March 31, 1999, convicting him of attempted assault in the first degree (two counts), reckless endangerment in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (two counts), attempted intimidation of a witness in the first degree, attempted tampering with a witness in the first degree, and tampering with a witness in the fourth degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the police lacked probable cause to arrest him is without merit. It is well settled that information provided by an identified citizen accusing another individual of a specific crime is legally sufficient to provide the police with probable cause to arrest *(see, People v Martin,*221 AD2d 568; *People v Burton,*194 AD2d 683). Since the complainant had known the defendant for several years, the complainant’s identification of the defendant as one of the shooters was sufficient to establish probable cause *(see, People v Martin,*supra;*People v Rodriguez,*168 AD2d 520). Accordingly, the County Court properly denied that branch of the appellant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. Krausman, J. P., S. Miller, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.
Exhibit
32.2





Certification
of Chief Financial Officer


Under
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Daleco Resources Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2008, I, Gary J.
Novinskie, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





(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.





Dated:  February 18,
2009
                /s/
      Gary J. NovinskieGary
      J. NovinskieChief
      Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Stephen J. Fanning, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Solta Medical, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Solta Medical,
Inc.



|                       |  |  |  |     |  |                        |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: November 4, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Stephen J. Fanning
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Name:                  |  | Stephen J. Fanning                   
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Title:                 |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

I, John F. Glenn, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Solta Medical, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Solta Medical, Inc.



|                       |  |  |  |     |  |                   |  |                        
|---------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 4, 2009 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ John F. Glenn
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Name:             |  | John F. Glenn          
|                       |  |  |  |     |  | Title:            |  | Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                            7759
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      506
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  8265
<PP&E>                                           30874
<DEPRECIATION>                                   13302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   26060
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              433
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       24120
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     26060
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9683
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     1560
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  1354
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   6770
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               6770
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      6770
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     7.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     7.20
        

</TABLE>
|   | (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 Fund. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: | February 17, 2011 |   |   |                                                 |
|--------|-------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
|   |              | By:    | /s/    | ROBERT E. SWANSON                                    |
|   |              |   | Name:  | Robert E. Swanson                                    |
|   |              |   | Title: | Chief Executive Officer                              |
|   |              |   |   | (Principal Executive Officer)                        |
|   |              |   |   |                                                 |
| Dated: | February 17, 2011 |   |   |                                                 |
|   |              | By:    | /s/    | KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRY                                 |
|   |              |   | Name:  | Kathleen P. McSherry                                 |
|   |              |   | Title: | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|   |              |   |   | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)         |
|   |              |   |   |                                                 |
|   |              |   |   |                                                 |

----
John A. HASTINGS aka John Hastings and Ilona P. Hastings Aka Ilona Hastings, Appellants, v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee for Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust Mortgage Pass-through Certificates, Series 2005-10, Appellee.

CASE NO. 1D15-4206

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 20, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 99.2

                            MAXUS REALTY TRUST, INC.

                           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 Maxus  Realty  Trust,  Inc.  (the
"Trust")  on Form  10-QSB for the period  ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John W.
Alvey,  Vice  President,  Chief  Financial and Accounting  Officer of the Trust,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

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

         (2) The  information  contained  in  the Report fairly presents, in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of operations of the
Trust as of June 30, 2002 (the last date of the period covered by the Report).


/s/ John W. Alvey
-----------------
John W. Alvey
Vice President
Chief Financial & Accounting Officer
August 14, 2002