alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Darryl Scott HONOWITZ, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. LOTUS & OAK, LLC, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-0448

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

AUGUST 23, 2018

ORDERED that appellee's motion to dismiss appeal is granted, and this appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Florida is hereby dismissed. *See**Cukierman v. Bankatlantic*, 89 So. 3d 250 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).

EMAS, FERNANDEZ and LUCK, JJ., concur.
William PARLAMAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-0627

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed September 12, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 30855 Su m m ar yC al endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. P E R C YF R A N K L IN , D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f ort he E as t er n D i st r i c tof Loui si ana U SD C N o. 2: 98- C R
- 207- 10 B ef ore JO N E S , C h i ef

Ju dg e, an d D AV IS an d W IE N E R , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * P ercy Fran kli n , federalpri soner #0 1 1 61-748, app eal s f rom t h e di st ri ct court’ s or der den yi n g h i m reli ef pu rsuan tt o 18 U . S . C . § 3582 (c) ( 2) an d the crack coca i ne a m e ndm e nt s t o t he Se nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s . Fr ank l i n was c o nvi c t e d of conspir acy t o di st ribu t e cr ack cocai n e an d p ow der coc ai n e. Frankl i n co nt ends t h a t th e di st r i c tc our ter r oneo usly f ound t hathi s 20- ye ars e nt e nc e w as t he m i ni m um m and at o r y s e nt e nc e f o rhi s o f fe ns e b e c aus e , he a r g u e s , th e m u r d e r s co m m itt e db yth e c o n s p ir a c yw e r e fo u n dn o t r e a s o n a b ly United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Janua ry 29, 2010 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Janua ry 29, 2010 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk Case: 08-30855 Document: 00511016221 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/29/2010N o. 08- 30855

2 f or es ee abl e t o hi m w hen h e w as s ent enc ed. The G ove r nm entc ont ends t hat F r a n k lin w a iv e da n ye n tit le m e n t t o § 3 5 8 2 (c )(2 ) r e lie f b e ca u se th e F ed era lP u b lic D efen der ap poi n t ed to represent Fran kli n saton the com m i t t ee t h at det erm i n ed F ra n k li n w a s in e li g ib le fo r s u ch re li e f. T h e G overnm en t ’ s w aiver argum en tis u n ava i l i n g. M oreover, the d i st ri ct court’ s f i n di n g t h at F ra n k li n previ ou sl y h ad i n curred a fel on y dru g convic t i on r a is e dh is m a n d a to r ym in im u m s e n te n c e to 2 0 y e a r s o f im p r is o n m e n t. S ee 21 U . S. C. § 841 (b) ( 1) (A) (i i i) . Bec aus e F r ank l i n w as se nt e nc e d t o t he m i ni m um m and at o r y 20-yeart e r m , he w as i ne l i gibl e f o ra n a dj us t m e ntpur s uantt o t he c r a c k co c a in e g u id e lin e s . S eeU .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .10 , co m m e n t. (n .1)). AF F I RMED. Case: 08-30855 Document: 00511016221 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/29/2010
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: DED

Filters

              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)

## By Location

              - alaska(2)
              - arizona(3)
              - california(7)
              - connecticut(1)
              - florida(1)
              - hawaii(1)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(1)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(2)
              - new mexico(1)
              - oregon(1)
              - puerto rico(1)
              - rhode island(1)
              - vermont(1)
              - washington(2)
              - wisconsin(1)
              - (-)wyoming(1)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        November 18, 2021        PubTalk-11/2021: Busting Myths About One of the Largest Volcanic Systems in the World - The Top 10 Misconceptions about Yellowstone Volcanism
## 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)
              - idaho(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - montana(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - north dakota(1)

## By Year

Education        July 5, 2018        Declination of the Earth 1590-1990

Education        September 21, 2023        Southwestern and Northwestern Pond Turtle Pottery by Kaili Gregory

Education        September 15, 2023        Lizzy's Northern Bobwhite

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

Education        June 21, 2023        Lepidoptera Research Collection

Featured Story        October 14, 2015        Birds in the Bakken: Oil Development Can Affect Critical Habitat

Education        May 19, 2022        USGS Scientists Explain How Aquifer Compaction is Measured
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50151

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

NOE HERRERA,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-92-CR-239-3

- - - - - - - - - -

April 15, 1997

Before REAVLEY, DAVIS, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Noe Herrera appeals his resentencing pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2). The district court did not err in not reducing his

fine. See 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2); U.S.S.G., Appendix C amd. 505;

United States v. Segler, 37 F.3d 1131, 1135 (5th Cir. 1994). 

Herrera did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel for

failing to argue for a reduction in the fine. See Koch v.

Puckett, 907 F.2d 524, 527 (5th Cir. 1990).
No.

- 2 -

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

      CERTIFICATION 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, Lissa A. Goldenstein, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report of
Argonaut Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2002 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 Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Argonaut Technologies, Inc.

Date: November 11, 2002                By:  /s/ LISSA A. GOLDENSTEIN
                                            ------------------------------------
                                       Name:  Lissa A. Goldenstein
                                       Title: President, Chief Executive Officer



I, David J. Foster, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report of
Argonaut Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2002 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 Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Argonaut Technologies, Inc.


Date: November 11, 2002      By:  /s/ DAVID J. FOSTER
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                             Name:  David J. Foster
                             Title:  Sr. Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Earth

Filters

              - science_education(87)
              - science_faqs(12)
              - science_science(562)
              - products_data(327)
              - products_maps(82)
              - products_publications(3046)
              - products_software(11)
              - products_web_tools(36)
              - multimedia_audio(224)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(213)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(11)
              - multimedia_before_after(30)
              - multimedia_image(1326)
              - multimedia_image-141769(111)
              - multimedia_image-141770(16)
              - multimedia_image-141771(734)
              - multimedia_image-141772(18)
              - multimedia_image-141774(7)
              - multimedia_image-141775(141)
              - multimedia_image-141776(81)
              - multimedia_image-141783(2)
              - multimedia_image-204460(215)
              - multimedia_image-207195(1)
              - multimedia_slideshow(21)
              - multimedia_video(600)
              - multimedia_video-149194(179)
              - multimedia_video-149195(233)
              - multimedia_video-149196(42)
              - multimedia_video-149197(65)
              - multimedia_video-149198(46)
              - multimedia_video-149225(4)
              - multimedia_webcam(1)
              - multimedia_webcam-141785(1)
              - documents_file(1062)
              - (-)documents_file-149203(2)
              - documents_file-149204(8)
              - documents_file-149206(2)
              - documents_file-149208(2)
              - documents_file-149209(1)
              - documents_file-149210(2)
              - documents_file-149213(4)
              - documents_file-149214(19)
              - documents_file-149215(1)
              - documents_file-149216(1)
              - documents_file-149217(2)
              - documents_file-149218(4)
              - documents_file-149219(1)
              - documents_file-149220(17)
              - documents_file-149222(990)
              - documents_file-149224(6)
              - news_news-149245(47)
              - news_news-149246(9)
              - news_news-149247(1)
              - news_news-149248(40)
              - news_news-149249(19)
              - news_news-149250(44)
              - news_newsletters(26)
              - news_other_news(286)
              - connect_locations(2)
              - connect_social_media(8)
              - connect_staff_profiles(159)
              - other_basic-37(19)
              - other_basic-42(245)
              - other_basic-43(1)

## By Location

## By Year

Forms        March 29, 2023        Shipboard Core Metadata Spreadsheet (SESAR)

Forms        March 29, 2023        Shipboard Dredge Metadata Spreadsheet (SESAR)
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-6097

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. SAMUEL BENJAMIN KELLY, a/k/a Tiz, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, District Judge. (2:94-cr-00163-RBS-4; 2:98-cv-00569-RBS) Submitted: April 17, 2008 Decided: April 23, 2008 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Samuel Benjamin Kelly, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Samuel Benjamin Kelly seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion seeking reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Kelly has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Kelly’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously- 3 - unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2), 2255 (2000). Kelly’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
C OURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JEREMIAH SUSTAITA

,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 8

- 00 142

- C R

Appeal from the

34 th District Court

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 20150D0 0821 )

O R D E R

On August 14, 2018, Appellant filed notice of appeal from interlocutory rulings made by

the trial court, including an order denying Appellant’s motion to dismiss. The Court notified

Appellant of its intent to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction an d Appellant filed his written

response. On August 17, 2018, Appellant filed an emergency motion to stay proceedings in the

trial court, including the jury trial set for August 20, 2018. The motion to stay is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1 7 th day of A ugust , 20 1 8

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure , C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox , JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6037

KEVIN TERRY DOTSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN OF KEEN MOUNTAIN CORRECTIONAL CENTER,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior 

District Judge. (7:13-cv-00529-JLK-RSB)

Submitted: May 11, 2015 Decided: May 21, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin Terry Dotson, Appellant Pro Se. Rosemary Virginia Bourne, 

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kevin Terry Dotson seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. We 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice 

of appeal was not timely filed. 

Parties are accorded 30 days after the entry of the 

district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the 

appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely 

filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional 

requirement.” Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

November 7, 2014. The notice of appeal was filed on January 5, 

2015.* Because Dotson failed to file a timely notice of appeal 

or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we 

deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

 * For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date 

appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could 

have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to 

the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 

(1988).
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Kristy Ann EVANS, Appellant, v. David Edward MILLER, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-4090

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed October 12, 2018

Kristy Ann Evans, Fort Lauderdale, pro se.

Linda A. Wagner, of Middleton & Middleton, P.A., Melrose, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The former wife, Kristy Ann Evans, appeals the trial court's order granting the former husband's, David Edward Miller, supplemental petition to modify timesharing, the parenting plan, and child support. The former wife argues that we "should revisit the issues" to determine whether the trial court properly granted the former husband's supplemental petition.

Because we do not have a transcript of the proceedings below, we cannot address the former wife's contention that the trial court's decision on the issues is without evidentiary support. *See**Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee*, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979). Thus, we must affirm unless the former wife can demonstrate that "fundamental error appears on the face of the appealed order."

*661*Murphy v. Murphy*, 948 So.2d 864, 865 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007). The former wife has made no such showing in this case.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, EVANDER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Kerrick L. HARRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4449

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 12, 2018

Kerrick L. Harris, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and KHOUZAM and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
IN the INTEREST OF M.T. and H.T., children,

C.L., Appellant, v. Department of Children and Families and Guardian ad Litem Program, Appellees.

Case No. 2D18-1129

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed September 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2021506EN.01024101.xml

| 15.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 506/241 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 506/241

---

P9_TA(2021)0149

Union Anti-Fraud Programme 2021-2027 ***II

European Parliament legislative resolution of 29 April 2021 on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Union Anti-Fraud Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 250/2014 (05330/1/2021 — C9-0108/2021 — 2018/0211(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

(2021/C 506/42)

The European Parliament,

| — | having regard to the Council position at first reading (05330/1/2021 — C9-0108/2021), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the Council position at first reading (05330/1/2021 — C9-0108/2021),

| — | having regard to the opinion of the Commission ((COM(2021)0149), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the opinion of the Commission ((COM(2021)0149),

| — | having regard to its position at first reading (1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0386), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to its position at first reading (1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0386),

| — | having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

| — | having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 74(4) of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 74(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure, |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure,

| — | having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0126/2021), |
| --- | --- |

—

having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A9-0126/2021),

| 1. | Approves the Council position at first reading; |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position; |
| --- | --- |

2.

| 3. | Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

3.

| 4. | Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

4.

| 5. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments. |
| --- | --- |

5.

---

(1)  Text adopted of 12.2.2019, P8_TA(2019)0068.

---
J.G. HAMILTON, Appellant, v. Tatiana BASOVA, Appellee.

No. 4D18-881

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[October 4, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

*Affirmed.*