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

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1213

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Rashawn Chambers, *

also known as Red, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 6, 2005

Filed: October 20, 2005

___________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Rashawn Chambers pleaded guilty under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure

11(c)(1)(C) to conspiring to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base, in violation

of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and the district court1

 sentenced him to 120 months in prison and

5 years of supervised release. On appeal, his counsel has moved to withdraw and filed

a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
-2-

Counsel’s sole argument is that the district court should have sentenced

Chambers to less than 120 months in prison. However, Chambers cannot challenge

this sentence because he expressly agreed to it as part of his plea agreement. See

United States v. Reyes-Contreras, 349 F.3d 524, 525 (8th Cir. 2003) (per curiam);

United States v. Nguyen, 46 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1995). Moreover, 120 months

in prison is the statutory minimum for the offense. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75 (1988), we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, and we grant counsel’s

motion to withdraw.

______________________________
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth

Filters

              - science_education(4)
              - science_science(20)
              - products_data(34)
              - products_maps(3)
              - products_publications(71)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_audio(3)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(3)
              - multimedia_image(16)
              - (-)multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141770(1)
              - multimedia_image-141771(6)
              - multimedia_image-141775(1)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_image-204460(6)
              - multimedia_video(26)
              - multimedia_video-149194(11)
              - multimedia_video-149195(12)
              - multimedia_video-149197(1)
              - documents_file(1)
              - documents_file-149219(1)
              - news_news-149245(4)
              - news_news-149246(1)
              - news_news-149248(4)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_news-149250(1)
              - news_newsletters(2)
              - news_other_news(4)
              - connect_staff_profiles(2)

## By Location

              - (-)alaska(1)
              - arizona(1)
              - california(1)

## By Year

Historical        December 31, 1964        Uplifted dock on Hinchinbrook Island, Alaska
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7460

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

MARC ERIC JOHNSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District 

Judge. (1:10-cr-00446-LO-4; 1:14-cv-00431-LO)

Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 17, 2016

Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Marc Eric Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Marc Birnbaum, Scott 

Andrew Claffee, Special Assistant United States Attorneys, Bryan 

Michael Byrd, Kellen Sean Dwyer, Jason David Jones, Adam 

Ptashkin, Michael R. Tregle, Anna A. Vlasova, OFFICE OF THE 

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Mary Katherine Barr Daly, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Marc Eric Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B)

(2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a 

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_education(5)
              - science_faqs(5)
              - science_science(341)
              - products_data(70)
              - products_maps(16)
              - products_publications(2978)
              - products_software(4)
              - products_web_tools(7)
              - multimedia_audio(53)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(47)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(6)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(130)
              - multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141770(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(106)
              - multimedia_image-141772(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(10)
              - multimedia_image-141776(7)
              - multimedia_slideshow(3)
              - multimedia_video(146)
              - multimedia_video-149194(74)
              - multimedia_video-149195(32)
              - multimedia_video-149196(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149198(6)
              - multimedia_video-149225(6)
              - documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149206(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(21)
              - news_news-149246(4)
              - news_news-149248(27)
              - news_news-149249(4)
              - news_news-149250(2)
              - news_newsletters(3)
              - news_other_news(31)
              - (-)connect_staff_profiles(6)
              - other_basic-42(8)

## By Location

              - alaska(3)
              - colorado(2)
              - hawaii(3)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - oregon(1)

## By Year

              - 2024(5)
              - 2023(1)

B-roll        June 7, 2023        Timelapse of Halema‘uma‘u eruption, Kīlauea volcano — June 7-9, 2023

staff profileSharon K Taylor, DVM, PhD

staff profileHeidi Leathers-Miller

B-roll        March 10, 2021        Kīlauea summit — webcam time-lapse

staff profileSteven M Matsuoka

B-roll        January 5, 2023        KWcam at Kīlauea's summit captures eruption within Halemaʻumaʻu crater

B-roll        May 9, 2023        Bird Collisions: Current Science and Future Opportunities

staff profileNicholas J Van Lanen, PhD

staff profileShannon Brewer, PhD

B-roll        April 15, 2014        Polar Bear - POV Cams (Spring 2014)

staff profileBarbara Martin

B-roll        August 18, 2019        Time-lapse video of bluff erosion on Barter Island, Alaska
**Exhibit 32.1**

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

          In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A-1 for fiscal year ended July 31, 2006 of Magnus International Resources Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Annual Report”), I, Graham Taylor, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and a director of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Annual Report 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 the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 			   Dated: March 29, 2007                                                        /s/ Graham Taylor                                                                                                                              Graham Taylor, President, CEO, Chief			                                                                                            Financial Officer and Director (Principal			                                                                                            Executive Officer and Principal Financial			                                                                                            Officer)
Matthew SALLA, Appellant, v. PNC BANK, National Association, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-1052

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed July 11, 2018

Mark P. Stopa of Stopa Law Firm, LLC, Tampa, and Latasha Scott of Lord Scott, PLLC, Tampa, for Appellant.

Kimberly Held Israel, N. Mark New, II, and William L. Grimsley of McGlinchey Stafford, Jacksonville; and Joseph A. Apatov of McGlinchey Stafford, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, VILLANTI, and KHOUZAM, JJ., Concur.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Declination

Filters

              - science_education(5)
              - science_faqs(5)
              - science_science(341)
              - products_data(70)
              - products_maps(16)
              - products_publications(2978)
              - products_software(4)
              - products_web_tools(7)
              - multimedia_audio(53)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(47)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(6)
              - multimedia_before_after(3)
              - multimedia_image(130)
              - multimedia_image-141769(1)
              - multimedia_image-141770(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(106)
              - multimedia_image-141772(1)
              - multimedia_image-141774(3)
              - multimedia_image-141775(10)
              - multimedia_image-141776(7)
              - multimedia_slideshow(3)
              - multimedia_video(146)
              - multimedia_video-149194(74)
              - multimedia_video-149195(32)
              - multimedia_video-149196(5)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)
              - multimedia_video-149198(6)
              - multimedia_video-149225(6)
              - documents_file(2)
              - documents_file-149206(1)
              - documents_file-149220(1)
              - news_news-149245(21)
              - news_news-149246(4)
              - news_news-149248(27)
              - (-)news_news-149249(4)
              - (-)news_news-149250(2)
              - news_newsletters(3)
              - news_other_news(31)
              - connect_staff_profiles(6)
              - other_basic-42(8)

## By Location

              - california(1)
              - colorado(1)
              - idaho(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - montana(1)
              - nebraska(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new mexico(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - south dakota(1)
              - texas(1)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

Technical Announcement        June 16, 2017        USGS: High Plains Aquifer Groundwater Levels Continue to Decline

Technical Announcement        May 14, 2015        Preliminary Wind Energy Impacts Assessment Methodology Released

Featured Story        March 6, 2023        Building maps to help geothermal energy and greater sage-grouse coexist in Nevada’s sagebrush country

Technical Announcement        December 16, 2022        DARPA Announces Winners of Artificial Intelligence  Competition to Aid Critical Minerals Assessments

Technical Announcement        January 30, 2017        Shrinking Number of Long-term Monitoring Sites Could Hamper Scientists’ Ability to Measure Recovery of Impaired Streams

Featured Story        October 14, 2015        Birds in the Bakken: Oil Development Can Affect Critical Habitat
Yasmin V. SOLIS, etc., Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Rosalyn RODRIGUEZ-KOPPEL, etc., Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-1695

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

AUGUST 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
# C_2020117EN.01000101.xml

| 8.4.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/1

---

Notice for the attention of the persons to whom measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP, as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/512 and in Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/510 concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Iran apply

(2020/C 117/01)

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2011/235/CFSP (1), as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/512 (2) and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 359/2011 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/510 (4) concerning restrictive measures directed against certain persons, entities and bodies in view of the situation in Iran.

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the above-mentioned Annexes should continue to be included in the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2011/235/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 359/2011.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 359/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 4 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council before 31 December 2020, together with supporting documentation that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| RELEX.1.C |
| General Secretariat |
| Rue de la Loi 175/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Council of the European Union

RELEX.1.C

General Secretariat

Rue de la Loi 175/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council’s decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, 2nd paragraph, and Article 263, 4th and 6th paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 51.

(2)  OJ L 113, 8.4.2020, p.22.

(3)  OJ L 100, 14.4.2011, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 113, 8.4.2020, p.1.

---
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Tabatha V, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the
period ending September 30, 2004 (the "Report"), I, John Ballard, President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

> 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's
> financial position and results of operations.

/s/John Ballard



 John Ballard,

 President and Chief Financial Officer

November 12, 2004
IN RE: COMMITTEE ON BAR ADMISSIONS CFN-978270

NO. 2018-BA-1468

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 15, 2018

BAR ADMISSIONS PROCEEDING

PER CURIAM

After reviewing the evidence and considering the law, we conclude petitioner is eligible to be conditionally admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana, subject to the following conditions:

1. Petitioner shall continue to comply with the terms of the recovery agreement he signed with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program ("JLAP") on July 3, 2018.

2. The period of this conditional admission shall coincide with the period of petitioner's JLAP agreement. However, petitioner's conditional admission status shall not be terminated until this court so orders.

3. Petitioner shall authorize the Executive Director of JLAP to report any violations of the JLAP agreement to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC").

4. Upon the expiration of the term of petitioner's JLAP agreement, the Executive Director of JLAP shall forward to the ODC (a) a final report of petitioner's progress and participation in JLAP, and (b) a recommendation regarding the need for petitioner's continued participation in JLAP.

5. Following receipt of the report from JLAP, the ODC shall file a report in this court in which it shall recommend whether the conditional admission shall be allowed to terminate or shall be extended.

6. Petitioner shall cooperate with JLAP and the ODC, and shall comply with any and all requirements imposed upon him by JLAP and the ODC.

Should petitioner fail to make a good faith effort to satisfy these conditions, or should he commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional right to practice may be terminated or he may be subjected to other discipline pursuant to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement.

**CONDITIONAL ADMISSION GRANTED.**
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PARAMJIT SINGH,

 Petitioner,

 v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 13-74266

Agency No. A205-243-560

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted June 14, 2016**

Before: BEA, WATFORD, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

Paramjit Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for asylum, 

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture 

 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

JUN 21 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 13-74266 

(“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for 

substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards 

governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, 

Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010), and we review de 

novo due process claims, Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1011 (9th Cir. 2010). 

We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination 

based on inconsistencies as to the length of Singh’s first detention and the amount 

his father paid a smuggler to bring him to the United States, as well as on the 

omission from Singh’s father’s affidavit of Singh’s first detention, beating, and 

subsequent hospitalization. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was 

reasonable under the “totality of circumstances”). The explanations Singh raised

before the BIA do not compel a contrary result, see Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 

1245 (9th Cir. 2000), and we lack jurisdiction to consider the contentions Singh 

raises for the first time in his opening brief, see Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 

678 (9th Cir. 2004) (requiring administrative exhaustion of legal claims). We 

reject Singh’s contention that the IJ applied the wrong legal standard. In the 

absence of credible testimony, Singh’s asylum and withholding of removal claims 
 3 13-74266 

fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Singh’s CAT claim 

because it was based on the same evidence found not credible and the record does 

not otherwise compel the finding that it is more likely than not Singh would be 

tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to 

India. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048-49.

Finally, we reject Singh’s contentions that the IJ violated his due process 

rights. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d at 1046 (requiring error to prevail on a due 

process claim). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.