alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Milford Wade BYRD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. SC17-1733

Supreme Court of Florida.

[February 28, 2018]

Neal Dupree, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Bryan E. Martinez, Staff Attorney, and Martin J. McClain, Special Assistant Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, Southern Region, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, for Appellant

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, and Marilyn Muir Beccue, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, Florida, for Appellee

PER CURIAM.

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

Byrd's motion sought relief pursuant to the United States Supreme Court's decision in *923*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.), *cert. denied* , --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017), Byrd responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why *Hitchcock* should not be dispositive in this case.

After reviewing Byrd's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Byrd is not entitled to relief. Byrd was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death. *Byrd v. State* , 481 So.2d 468, 471 (Fla. 1985).1 Byrd's sentence of death became final in 1986. *Byrd v. Florida* , 476 U.S. 1153, 106 S.Ct. 2261, 90 L.Ed.2d 705 (1986). Thus, *Hurst* does not apply retroactively to Byrd's sentence of death. *See**Hitchcock* , 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Byrd's motion.

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

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

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

LEWIS and CANADY, JJ., concur in result.

QUINCE, J. recused.

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* .

1

The jury's vote to recommend death is unknown. This Court's opinion on direct appeal merely states that "[t]he jury returned an advisory recommendation of the death penalty." *Byrd* , 481 So.2d at 471.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

  <ARTICLE> 5
  <LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS  FOR MAXUS  REALTY  TRUST,  INC.  AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
  </LEGEND>
  <CIK>0000748580
  <MULTIPLIER> 1
  <NAME> MAXUS REALTY TRUST, INC.

  <S>                                                  <C>
  <PERIOD-TYPE>                                      3-MOS
  <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
  <PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-1-2000
  <PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-2000
  <CASH>                                            697,000
  <SECURITIES>                                            0
  <RECEIVABLES>                                     326,000
  <ALLOWANCES>                                            0
  <INVENTORY>                                             0
  <CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        0
  <PP&E>                                         21,854,000
  <DEPRECIATION>                                  6,168,000
  <TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 17,481,000
  <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   0
  <BONDS>                                         6,535,000
  <COMMON>                                        1,040,000
  <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
  <PREFERRED>                                             0
  <OTHER-SE>                                     10,226,000
  <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   17,481,000
  <SALES>                                         2,071,000
  <TOTAL-REVENUES>                                2,292,000
  <CGS>                                                   0
  <TOTAL-COSTS>                                           0
  <OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,741,000
   <LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
  <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                301,000
  <INCOME-PRETAX>                                   207,000
  <INCOME-TAX>                                            0
  <INCOME-CONTINUING>                               250,000
  <DISCONTINUED>                                          0
  <EXTRAORDINARY>                                    43,000
  <CHANGES>                                               0
  <NET-INCOME>                                      207,000
  <EPS-BASIC>                                         .22
  <EPS-DILUTED>                                           0



</TABLE>
Corrective 

Actions: 

new PIN 318632501, HPC drum rotor assembly, which is not susceptible to subject 

cracking, is made available through SB PW300-72-24376, as terminating action for the 

required repeat inspection. 

Recent data (Ref: SIL: PW300-093) indicate that a number of high-time 

Pre-SB-PW300-72-24376 HPC drum rotor assemblies (PINS 3082478 and 30B2542), with 

potential for a hazardous disk failure in consequence of non-compliance with the inspection 

requirements, are still in-service. This AD is issued to mandate the inspection of the affected 

PIN 3082478 and 3082542 HPC drum rotor assemblies in accordance with 

PW305-MM-05-20-00 requirements. 

On all PW305A and PW305B engines with post SB PW300-72-824462 HPC drum rotor 

assemblies PINS 30B2478 and 3082542, accomplish the following: 

1. Within 500 hours airtime after effective date of this directive, gain access to inside of 

affected HPC rotor assembly and inspect (boroscope) its interior for cracks in 

accordance with the PW305 MM 05-20-00 "Periodic Inspections, Boroscope" 

requirements. If a crack is found, remove the engine before next flight for HPC drum 

rotor replacement. 

Note: Inspection of affected HPC drum rotor assembly per SB PW300-72-824462 

and/or PW305 MM 05-20-00 requirements prior to the effective date of this 

directive satisfies the requirements of paragraph I of this directive. 

Puouant to CAR 202.51 the registered owner of a Canadlan alrcrafl shall, within seven days, nolify lhe Mlnlster 

in wiling of any change of his or her name or address. 

To request a chan e of address, contact the Chrll AvbUon Comrnunlcatlom Centre (AARC) at Place de Vllle. kwa. Ontarlo KlAONI. or 1-800-305-2059, or www.tc.gc~c~lbvbUonlcorrrrmnluUondee addressasp
This certification is being furnished as required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
Exchange Act) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This
certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except as otherwise stated in such filing.



Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(B) AND 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 Smithtown Bancorp (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on November 14, 2003, (the Report), I, Bradley E. Rock, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that:



| | (1) | the Report fully complies 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: November 14, 2003



/s/    Bradley E. RockBradley E. Rock Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Smithtown
Bancorp
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 Homeland Security

###### Bureau of Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Announcement of the quota quantity of tuna in airtight containers for Calendar Year 2009.

# SUMMARY:

Each year the tariff-rate quota for tuna described in subheading 1604.14.22, HTSUS, is based on the apparent United States consumption of tuna in airtight containers during the preceding Calendar Year. This document sets forth the tariff-rate quota for Calendar Year 2009.

# EFFECTIVE DATES:

The 2009 tariff-rate quota is applicable to tuna entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption during the period January 1, through December 31, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Headquarters Quota Branch, Textile/Apparel Policy and Programs Division, Trade Policy and Programs, Office of International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Washington, DC 20229, (202) 863-6560.

## Background

                        It has been determined that 18,457,467 kilograms of tuna in air-tight containers may be entered and withdrawn from warehouse for consumption during the Calendar Year 2009, at the rate of 6 percent                         *ad valorem*                         under subheading 1604.14.22, HTSUS. Any such tuna which is entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption during the current calendar year in excess of this quota will be dutiable at the rate of 12.5 percent                         *ad valorem*                         under subheading 1604.14.30 HTSUS.                     

Dated: April 1, 2009.

Daniel Baldwin,

Assistant Commissioner, Office of International Trade.

[FR Doc. E9-7612 Filed 4-3-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9110-06-P
This
      certification is being furnished as required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter
      63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, and shall not be deemed “filed” for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability
      of that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be incorporated
      by
      reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange
      Act,
      except as otherwise stated in such filing.




EXHIBIT
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) AND 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 Smithtown Bancorp (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30 ,
      2006 as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2006, (the
      “Report”), I, Bradley E. Rock, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
      of the Company, certify in my capacity as an officer of the Company, pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that
      to
      the best of my knowledge:





(1)
            the
                Report fully complies 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.








Dated:
      November 8, 2006


/s/
      Bradley E. Rock


Bradley
      E. Rock, Chairman, President


and
      Chief
      Executive Officer
- 1

- 

### S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N

**C O U R T O F A P P E A L S**

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee, UNPUBLISHED October 10, 2017

v No. 332890 Wayne Circuit Court

DELSON EDWARD SIMMONS II, LC No. 15

- 009743

- 02

- FC

Defendant

- Appellant.

Before: S AAD

, P .J., and C AVANAGH and C AMERON , JJ.

P ER C URIAM

.

Defendant appeals by leave granted 1 his plea

- based conviction of assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder, MCL 750.84

. Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant was

sentenced to 1 to 10 years ’ imprisonment. Defendant now appeals the imposition of court costs as ordered at his sentencing. We remand

.

Defendant contends that the trial court was required to provide a factual basis for the assessment of court costs in the amount of $1,300; thus, remand is required. After review of this unpreserved issue for plain error affecting defendant’s substantial rights, w e agree. See People v

K

onopka (On Remand) , 309 Mich App 345 , 356 ; 869 NW2d 651 (2015)

.

The parties agree that MCL 769.1k allowed the trial court to order defendant to pay “any cost reasonably related to the actual costs incurred by the trial court without separately calculating those costs involved in the part icular case[.]” MCL 769.1k(1)(b)( iii ). However, as in

the Konopka case, here, the trial court did not articulate a factual basis for the costs imposed. Konopka , 309 Mich App at 359. And “without a factual basis for the costs imposed, we cannot

determin e whether the costs imposed were reasonably related to the actual costs incurred by the trial court, as required by MCL 769.1k(1)(b)( iii ).” Id

. at 359

- 360. While the prosecution makes a sound argument that the amount of $1,300 in costs is reasonable in l ight of the typical costs of adjudicating such criminal proceedings, as in Konopka , defendant “should be given the

1 People v Simmons , unpublished order of the Court of Appeals, entered June 23, 2016 (Docket No. 332890).- 2

- opportunity to challenge the reasonableness of the costs imposed.” Id . at 360. Accordingly, this

matter is remanded to the trial court for the purpose of establishing a factual basis for the $1,300 in costs imposed under MCL 769.1(b)( iii ), or to adjust that figure as necessary. See id

.

Remanded. We do not retain jurisdiction.

/s/ Henry William Saad /s/ Mark J. Cavanagh

/s/ Thomas C. Camer on
Jasper STUART, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-146

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed October 4, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
I.L., a juvenile, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D16-2127

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed April 26, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information
extracted from unaudited financial statements for the
six month period ending June 30, 1998 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>        0000748524
<NAME>       TWELVE AMH ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY>   U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                       JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                         JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                1
<CASH>                                                   180,996
<SECURITIES>                                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               0
<PP&E>                                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           184,887
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          0
<BONDS>                                                        0
<COMMON>                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                                          (102,503,257)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             184,887
<SALES>                                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               0
<CGS>                                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         352,315
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                     4,380,784
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       (6,425,733)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (6,425,733)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                0
<CHANGES>                                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                          (6,425,733)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (10,602.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (10,602.46)
        


</TABLE>
Christopher Keith BELCHER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D15-3657

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 15, 2017.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

________________________

No. ACM S32710

________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Saul ANTONIO

Airman First Class (E-3), U.S. Air Force, Appellant

________________________

Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary

Decided 11 April 2022

________________________

Military Judge: Brian C. Mason

Sentence: Sentence adjudged on 14 July 2021 by SpCM convened at 

Scott Air Force Base, Illinois. Sentence entered by military judge on 23 

August 2021: Bad-conduct discharge, hard labor without confinement 

for 45 days, restriction to the limits of Scott Air Force Base, Illinois for 

20 days, and a reprimand.

For Appellant: None.*

For Appellee: Major Abbigayle C. Hunter, USAF; Mary Ellen Payne, Esquire.

Before KEY, ANNEXSTAD, and MEGINLEY, Appellate Military 

Judges.

________________________

This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as 

precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 30.4.

________________________

 

* On 14 July 2021 and again on 6 August 2021, Appellant declined, in writing, appellate 

defense counsel representation. See United States v. Xu, 70 M.J. 140 (C.A.A.F. 2011) 

(mem.); see also Department of the Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of 

Military Justice, ¶ 14.5.1, 2 (18 Jan. 2019). 
United States v. Antonio, No. ACM S32710

2

PER CURIAM:

The findings and sentence as entered are correct in law and fact, and no 

error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles 

59(a) and 66(d), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(d), 

Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2019 ed.). Accordingly, the findings 

and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT

CAROL K. JOYCE

Clerk of the Court
Rhondel PARIS, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D17-1616

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

JULY 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 78 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 78

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 31, 2023.
    Resolved,

SECTION 1. TOTAL NUMBER OF MEMBERS OF CERTAIN SELECT COMMITTEES AND 
              SUBCOMMITTEES.

    (a) Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.--Clause 11(a)(1) of rule X 
of the Rules of the House of Representatives is amended by striking ``not more 
than 22 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner, of whom not more than 
13 may be from the same party'' and inserting ``not more than 25 Members, 
Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner, of whom not more than 14 may be from 
the same party''.
    (b) Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States 
and the Chinese Communist Party.--Section 1(a)(2)(A) of House Resolution 11, as 
agreed to January 10, 2023, is amended by striking ``composed of not more than 
16 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, 
not more than 7 of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority 
leader'' and inserting ``composed of not more than 24 Members, Delegates, or the 
Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, not more than 11 of whom shall 
be appointed after consultation with the minority leader''.
    (c) Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.--
Section 1(a)(2)(A) of House Resolution 12, as agreed to January 10, 2023, is 
amended by striking ``together with not more than 13 other Members, Delegates, 
or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 5 
shall be appointed in consultation with the minority leader'' and inserting 
``together with not more than 12 other Members, Delegates, or the Resident 
Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 9 shall be 
appointed in consultation with the minority leader''.
    (d) Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.--Section 4(a)(1)(B)(i) 
of House Resolution 5, as agreed to January 9, 2023, is amended by striking 
``not more than 12 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by 
the Speaker, of whom not more than 5 shall be appointed in consultation with the 
Minority Leader'' and inserting ``not more than 16 Members, Delegates, or the 
Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 7 shall be 
appointed in consultation with the Minority Leader''.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```