alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

Filed 6/13/23 P. v. Quinonez CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento)

----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JOSE QUINONEZ,

Defendant and Appellant. C097380

(Super. Ct. No. 16FE004174)

Defendant Jose Quinonez appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for

resentencing under Penal Code former section 117 0

. 95

. 1 Counsel filed a brief raising no

arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 or People v. Wende

(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and req uesting that we exercise our discretion to review the entire

record for arguable issues on appeal.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to section 1172.6

. (Stats. 2022, ch.
58, § 10.) There were no substantive changes to the statute.2

On February 14, 2023, we notified defendant that ( 1) counsel had filed a brief

indicating no arguable issues had been identified by counsel; ( 2) as a case arising from an

order denying postconviction relief, defendant was not entitled to counsel or to an

independent review of the record; and ( 3) in accordance with the procedures set forth in

Delgadillo , defendant had 30 days in which to file a s upplemental brief or letter raising

any argument he wanted this court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant if we

did not receive a letter or brief within that 30

- day period, the court may dismiss the

appeal as abandoned. More than 30 days have elapsed and we have received no

communication from defendant.

We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.

( People v. Delgadillo, supra , 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

KRAUSE , J.

We concur:

ROBIE , Acting P. J.

EARL , J.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2721 

To suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures containing fluopyram and 

pyrimethanil. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. CASEY introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on mixtures containing 

fluopyram and pyrimethanil. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. MIXTURES CONTAINING FLUOPYRAM AND 

4 PYRIMETHANIL. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2721 IS

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Mixtures containing N-{2-[3- 

chloro-5-(trifluoromethyl)-2- 

pyridinyl]ethyl}-α,α,αtrifluoro-o-toluamide 

(fluopyram) (CAS No. 

658066–35–4) and 4,6-dimethyl-N-phenylpyrimidin-2- 

amine (pyrimethanil) (CAS 

No. 53112–28–0) including 

application adjuvants (provided for in subheading 

3808.91.50) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 74 (Monday, April 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 17957]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8956]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER09-511-001]

PacifiCorp; Notice of Filing

April 13, 2009.
    Take notice that on April 1, 2009, PacifiCorp filed a revised 
section 1 to its LGIA Facilities Maintenance Agreement with Tasco 
Engineering, Inc., Service Agreement 537 under PacifiCorp's Seventh 
Revised Volume No. 11 Open Access Transmission Tariff, pursuant to the 
Commission's letter order issued March 2, 2009.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. 
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of 
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
[email protected], or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 22, 2009.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-8956 Filed 4-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
Phillips PIERRE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 4D17-3103

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 7, 2018]

Phillips Pierre, Wewahitchka, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Luke Napodano, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for petitioner.

Per Curiam.

The defendant petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d). According to the defendant, a manifest injustice has occurred because his appellate counsel failed to raise an argument *403which his co-defendant's appellate counsel successfully argued on appeal. We agree with the defendant and therefore grant the petition, vacate the defendant's convictions and sentences, and remand for a new trial.

The defendant and the co-defendant were convicted of first degree murder and attempted first degree murder following a joint trial. We affirmed the defendant's convictions on direct appeal. *Pierre v. State* , 156 So.3d 1101 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (unpublished table opinion).

However, we reversed the co-defendant's convictions because the prosecutor's closing argument improperly shifted the burden of proof and invited the jury to convict the defendants for failing to call a certain witness. *See**Reid v. State* , 222 So.3d 575, 577-79 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).

Based on the co-defendant's successful appeal, the defendant now contends that he is entitled to habeas relief because his appellate counsel did not raise the argument that the prosecutor improperly shifted the burden of proof and invited the jury to convict the defendants for failing to call a certain witness.

We agree with the defendant's argument. As we recently stated in *Johnson v. State* , 226 So.3d 908 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) :

> This Court has inherent authority to grant a writ of habeas corpus to avoid incongruous and manifestly unfair results. Relief may be granted even on a successive petition or claim where failing to do so would result in manifest injustice.

> Disparate treatment of similarly situated co-defendants can result in manifest injustice, warranting habeas relief. To give relief to one co-defendant but deny another co-defendant the same relief under virtually identical circumstances is a manifest injustice that does not promote-in fact, it corrodes-uniformity in the decisions of this court.

*Id.* at 910-11 (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).

Accordingly, we grant the petition, vacate the defendant's convictions and sentences, and remand for a new trial.

*Petition granted; convictions and sentences vacated; remanded for new trial.*

Gerber, C.J., Forst and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.
Daniel Jon PETERKA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Daniel Jon Peterka, Petitioner, v. Julie L. Jones, etc., Respondent.

No. SC17-593 No. SC17-1003

Supreme Court of Florida.

[January 22, 2018]

Linda McDermott of McClain and McDermott, Estero, Florida, for Appellant/Petitioner

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Charmaine M. Millsaps, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Florida, for Appellee/Respondent

PER CURIAM.

Daniel Jon Peterka appeals the circuit court's order denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus. We have jurisdiction. *See* art. V, § 3(b)(1), (9), Fla. Const.

Peterka seeks 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). This Court stayed Peterka's appeal and consideration of his habeas petition pending the disposition of *Hitchcock v. State*, 226 So.3d 216 (Fla. 2017), *cert. denied*, --- U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 513, 199 L.Ed.2d 396 (2017). After this Court decided *Hitchcock*, Peterka responded to this Court's order to show cause arguing why *Hitchcock* should not be dispositive in both cases.

After reviewing Peterka's response to the order to show cause, as well as the State's arguments in reply, we conclude that Peterka is not entitled to relief. Peterka was sentenced to death following a jury's recommendation for death by a vote of eight to four. *Peterka v. State*, 640 So.2d 59, 65 (Fla. 1994). Peterka's sentence of death became final in 1995. *Peterka v. Florida*, 513 U.S. 1129, 115 S.Ct. 940, 130 L.Ed.2d 884 (1995). Thus, *Hurst* does not *904apply retroactively to Peterka's sentence of death. *See**Hitchcock*, 226 So.3d at 217. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of Peterka's motion and deny his petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

The Court having carefully considered all arguments raised by Peterka, 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*.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2484 

To suspend temporarily the duty on p-toluidine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 26, 2012 

Mr. BROWN of Ohio introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on p-toluidine. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. P-TOLUIDINE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.43.16 p-toluidine (CAS No. 106– 

49–0) (provided for in subheading 2921.43.40) ............. Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2484 IS

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 99.1


                                 CERTIFICATION

I, Jimmy Whang, certify that:

         1.   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K in respect of the
              STRATS(SM) Trust For Morgan Stanley Securities, Series 2004-12
              (the "Trust") and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution
              or servicing reports filed in respect of periods included in the
              year covered by this annual report of the Trust;

         2.   Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as
              a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
              or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
              made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
              were made, not misleading as of the last day of the period
              covered by this annual report;

         3.   Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
              required to be provided to the Depositor by the Trustee under the
              trust agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
              these reports;

         4.   I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
              Depositor and the Trustee under the trust agreement and based
              upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under
              that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
              Depositor and Trustee have each fulfilled its obligations under
              that agreement; and

         5.   The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
              compliance by the Trustee and the Depositor with the minimum
              servicing or similar standards based upon the report provided by
              an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
              compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for
              Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the trust
              agreement that is included in these reports.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank Trust National
Association, as Trustee.

Date: March 28, 2005

/s/ Jimmy Whang
----------------------
Name:   Jimmy Whang
Title:  Director
Avonta DINKENS, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE and Tina Rena Tillman, Appellees.

Case No. 2D17-2957

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 25, 2018

Avonta Dickens, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Toni C. Bernstein, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee Department of Revenue.

No appearance for remaining Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the Department of Revenue's child support order without comment and *276without prejudice to any right Mr. Dinkens may have to seek modification of the support obligations in this administrative order, which were based on temporary custody and time-sharing arrangements that may differ from final time-sharing arrangements established by the final judgment of dissolution of marriage rendered after the order on appeal.

Affirmed.

KHOUZAM, LUCAS, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2536 

To suspend temporarily the duty on drinking glasses valued not over $0.30. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. REID introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on drinking glasses valued 

not over $0.30. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DRINKING GLASSES VALUED NOT OVER $0.30. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Drinking glasses valued not 

over $0.30 (provided for in 

subheading 7013.37.10) ........ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2536 IS

1 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

2 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit
32




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002






Each of
the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this
Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended June
30, 2008  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information
contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





This 14th
day of August, 2008








/s/ David D.
Stovall


Chief
Executive Officer








/s/ Annette
Banks


Chief
Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1




        Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-KSB of Pacific
Northwest Productions Inc. (Registrant), as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Deljit Bains,
Chief Executive Officer of Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:

   (1)  the annual 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 annual report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of Registrant.

                               PACIFIC NORTHWEST PRODUCTIONS INC.

Date:  March 24, 2006           /s/ Deljit Bains
                              ----------------------------------------
                             By: Deljit Bains, President and Chief
                                 Executive Officer
Exhibit 99.1

Annual Statement of
ComplianceProtective Life Secured Trust 2004-43 (the "Trust")

I, Millie
Cicero, a duly elected and acting officer of The Bank of New York ("Indenture Trustee"), do hereby certify on
behalf of the Indenture Trustee, that:

1.     I
have reviewed and examined the performance by the Indenture Trustee of the
collection and distribution of trust money pursuant to
Section 5.02 and, if applicable, Section 6.06 of the Indenture
pursuant to which the Trust's notes (the "Notes") were issued during the fiscal year
ending December 31, 2004 (the "Relevant
Year"); and

2.     Based
upon my review and examination described in 1 above, and except as provided in the Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, dated March 30, 2005, prepared by the Trust's
independent registered public accounting firm in accordance with Section 10 of the Expense and Indemnity
Agreement, to the best of my knowledge, the collection of payments on the funding agreements and distribution of payments to noteholders
pursuant to Section 5.02 and, if applicable, Section 6.06 of the
Indenture was performed in a satisfactory manner in all material respects
throughout the Relevant Year.

THE BANK OF NEW YORK, as Indenture Trustee

|By: |  | /s/MILLIE CICERO
      Name:  Millie
      CiceroTitle:    Assistant Treasurer |  |  |  | 
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  |  |  | 

Date:  March 30, 2005
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2524 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on DEMBB. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Ms. LANDRIEU introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on DEMBB. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. DEMBB. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.11.06 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 DEMBB) is amended by striking the date in the effective 

7 period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

10 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

11 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2016474EN.01000201.xml

| 17.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 474/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 474/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8265 — Carlyle/KAP)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 474/03)

On 13 December 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8265. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8265. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---