alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Tyrie Deveonta THEOPHILE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D16-2841

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 7, 2018]

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Tatjana Ostapoff, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Matthew Steven Ocksrider, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Kuntz, J.

*16The Defendant appeals his conviction for second-degree murder, aggravated battery, and robbery, and sentence of forty-five years' imprisonment. He raises several issues on appeal and we affirm each without comment except for one.

We agree with the Defendant that the court erred when it considered a fact at sentencing that specifically conflicted with a factual finding by the jury. *See, e.g.* , *Baehren v. State* , 234 So.3d 799 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 10, 2018) ; *Guerra v. State* , 212 So.3d 541, 542 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). While orally pronouncing the sentence, the court stated that the Defendant "pulled out a firearm"; that he was "brandishing a firearm"; and, again, that he "pulled out firearms." Yet as counsel for the Defendant noted at the hearing and again argues on appeal, the verdict form specifically asked if "the Defendant actually possess[ed] a firearm," and the jury answered "no."

Further, the convictions on other charges do not explain the court's statements. *Contra**Howard v. State* , 820 So.2d 337, 340 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Here, the jury specifically found the Defendant did not possess a firearm making it impossible to reconcile the court's statements at sentencing with the jury's verdict.

Because of the court's consideration of a fact at sentencing that specifically conflicts with the jury's verdict, we vacate the Defendant's sentence and remand the case for resentencing before a different circuit judge. The Defendant's conviction is otherwise affirmed.

*Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for resentencing.*

Gerber, C.J., and Gross, J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-02-2000
<CASH>                                         205,957
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,981
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     76,342
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               374,010
<PP&E>                                         482,400
<DEPRECIATION>                                 271,396
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 592,423
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           59,643
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,220
<OTHER-SE>                                     532,780
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   592,423
<SALES>                                        118,115
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               118,115
<CGS>                                           56,632
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   88,699
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 32,056
<INCOME-TAX>                                    10,354
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    21,702
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.34


</TABLE>
# Official Journal C 230/2021

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 230 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6415 June 2021 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 230

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6415 June 2021

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| 2021/C 230/01 | Statutes of the Extreme Light Infrastructure ERIC | 1 |

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

2021/C 230/01

Statutes of the Extreme Light Infrastructure ERIC

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Tuesday, October 20, 2015 

Sec.11.63 

Sec.11.81 Petition for Exemption 

A. Randy Pacheco 

68-615 Farrington Hwy. 14A 

Waialua, HI 96791 

(916) 765-6516 emailrandypacheco@yahoo.com 

A TP # 3134 7 63 other pilots to be added later: . 

--I 

To whom I submit my petition: 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 

Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590 

B. The specific section: Title 14 FAR 105.17 

C. The extent of relief we are seeking: Two years. 

D thru F. The reason we seek the relief: Safety for skydivers and other air traffic. Expanded 

explanation: The exemption we are seeking is for skydiving operations within a five mile 

corridor at Dillingham Airfield (PHDH), 2.5nm west of and 2.5nm east of the LZ (landing zone). 

Day time only in scattered to broken conditions with ceilings above 3,500ft and tops no higher 

than 9,000 feet with positive visual ground references. This narrow corridor, with mountains to 

the south and ocean to the north the DZ (drop zone), must be upwind of the LZ to safely fly 

parachutes back. At the present time we are dropping jumpers in VFR conditions and trying to 

fly back to the LZ. This is becoming more and more difficult to do safely and is resulting in more 

and more off-airport landings. See reference A. Allowing jumpers to freefall just clear of clouds 

or sometimes briefly through clouds and opening their parachutes under the bases of the clouds 

in the correct upwind, teardrop DZ would be much safer for the jumpers and the air traffic 

surrounding the airfield. The highest percentage of air traffic in and around Dillingham Airfield 

is skydiving operations, low level military helicopter ops, gliders below 3,000ft and very low 

level coast guard operations 500ft. There is very little General Aviation traffic. With no IFR 

traffic or airways in the area, also with communication with A TC, Unicorn, and company radio 

this can be done more safely than the present situation. This exemption would only be at 

Dillingham Airfield not outside the United States. 

Comments; Weather in the Dillingham Airfield area is challenging and constantly changing. 

Some time's in this narrow corridor on a typical day the trade winds at 3000ft. can be 20 to 30 

knots. Changing the cloud cover from scattered to broken to clear then sold in minutes. Rain 

showers to blue skies in minutes. The two C-208B Grand Caravan's we fly are equipped with 

dual-com GPS and TCAS. If the pilot and the skydivers have positive visual contact with ground 

references this can be conducted safely.
##### 



NATIONAL INTERSTATE CORPORATION
RESTRICTED SHARES AGREEMENT
  1. Grant of Restricted Shares
 2. Vesting of Restricted Shares
    3. Forfeiture of Shares
 4. Transferability
 1




---



##### 



5. Dividend, Voting and Other Rights provided however
 6. Custody of Restricted Shares
 7. No Employment Contract
 8. Taxes and Withholding
 2




---



##### 



9. Compliance with Law
 10. Amendments
 11. Severability
 12. Relation to Plan
 13. Successors and Assigns
 14. Governing Law
 15. Electronic Delivery
 3




---



##### 



NATIONAL INTERSTATE CORPORATIONBy:
    /s/ Paul F. HaffnerName: Paul F. HaffnerTitle: Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary  /s/ David W. MichelsonGranteeDate: March 12, 2007 4
Table of Contents
 
 Exhibit 13.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 UNDER THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED 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 CPFL Energia S.A. (the “Company”) does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: This Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 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 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   /s/ Lorival Nogueira Luz JuniorDate: December  12, 2011

   

   Lorival Nogueira Luz JuniorChief Financial Officer


---
OSWER/OSRTI 

Washington, DC 20460 

NATIONAL PRIORITIES LIST (NPL) 

***Final Site*** September 2014

 DELTA SHIPYARD Houma, Louisiana 

 Terrebonne Parish 

 Site Location:

The former Delta Shipyard is located at 200 Dean Court in southeastern Houma, Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana. The 

facility is located in a mixed industrial and residential area south of the city of Houma, Louisiana.

 Site History:

Delta Shipyard was a cleaning and repair facility for small cargo boats, fishing boats, and oil barges. Oily waste from 

the cleaning process was stored in several unlined earthen pits used as evaporation ponds. These pits were reportedly 

also used to dispose of oil field drilling material. Delta Shipyard was owned by Delta Ironworks, Inc. The entire 

property consisted of 165 acres and was home to seven divisions of Delta Ironworks, including Delta Shipyard. 

During the 1970s and 1980s, the property changed hands through several mergers and sales. In January 2012, the 

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality asked the EPA for assistance in evaluating this site. 

 Site Contamination/Contaminants:

Wetlands are contaminated with arsenic, antimony, anthracene, barium, benzene, cadmium, chromium, ethylbenzene, 

fluorene, lead, manganese, mercury, 2-methylnaphthalene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, pyrene, o-xylene and m,pxylene to the surface water pathway. In addition, three evaporation pits containing greater than 30,000 cubic yards of 

hazardous material are located in a wetland and may potentially release waste to nearby waterways. 

 Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment:

Large volumes of waste remain on site, and hazardous substances have been found in ground water, surface water and 

soil. The closest residential property is located approximately 400 feet west of the open pits. Without remediation 

of the site, additional releases to ground water, surface water and soil will continue. 

 Response Activities (to date):

No response actions have taken place. 

 Need for NPL Listing:

The site was referred to the EPA in 2012 from the state of Louisiana. Without listing the site, contamination will 

continue to pose a risk to human health and the environment. Other federal and state cleanup programs were 

evaluated, but are not viable at this time. The EPA received a letter of support for placing this site on the NPL from 

the state.

[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may 

change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent 

FR notices.]

For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to 

these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on 

the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp or by telephone at 1-888-42-ATSDR or 1-888-422-8737.
Michael MARCHETTI, Petitioner, v. FOREST MERE TOWNHOUSE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC. and John Pohle, Respondents.

Case No. 2D17-1515

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD
ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                             416
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,869
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,507
<PP&E>                                          40,734
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,456
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,874
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,268
<BONDS>                                         16,213
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        13,438
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,874
<SALES>                                          9,693
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,693
<CGS>                                            1,902
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,907
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (57)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 932
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,912
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,330
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,582
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,582
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 8.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF TELESAT HOLDINGS INC.1





|                     |  | State or Other Jurisdiction of | 
|-------------------- |  | ------------------------------ | 
|Subsidiary           |  | Incorporation or Organization  | 
|                     |  |                                | 
|Telesat Interco Inc. |  | Canada                         | 
|                     |  |                                | 
|Telesat Canada       |  | Canada                         | 





1 Excludes certain subsidiaries which, considered
in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, do not constitute a significant subsidiary (as defined in Rule 1-02(w) of Regulation
S-X) as of the year ended December 31, 2013.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       AND THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


I, Christine Koenemann, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial
Officer of Westbridge Research Group (the "Registrant"), does hereby certify in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (1)   the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Registrant, to which this
            certificate is attached as an exhibit (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), 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 Registrant.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Westbridge Research Group and will be retained by Westbridge
Research Group and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commissions or its
staff upon request.


July 19, 2007                           /s/ Christine Koenemann
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Principal Executive Officer and
                                        Principal Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO andCFO**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Davidson Diversified Real Estate II, L.P. (the"Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), StevenD. Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership,and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 

 

This certification isfurnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, April 22, 2009, 11 a.m. to April 22, 2009, 1 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on March 16, 2009, 74 FR 11120-11121.                

The meeting will be held May 12, 2009. The meeting time and location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: March 24, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-7198 Filed 4-1-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
EXHIBIT 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
      a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known
to us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period in which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused
such internal control over financial reporting to be designed
under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding
the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles;c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
  a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which
are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial information;
andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting.
 Date: June 9, 2011
    /s/ Robert E. DoseRobert E. DoseVice President of Finance of Virco Mfg. Corporation
(Principal Financial Officer)
Bradley WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3843

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 30, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.