alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE EX REL. Daryle GUILLOT v. STATE of Louisiana

No. 2017-KH-1708

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

October 29, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF AVOYELLES**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and relator fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Relator has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Relator's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, relator has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
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.                  

###### Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board

# DATES:

December 19, 2024 at 10 a.m. ET.

# ADDRESSES:

                        Telephonic. Dial-in (listen only) information: Number: 1-202-599-1426, Code: 454 381 790#; or via web:                         *https://www.frtib.gov/​*.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kimberly Weaver, Office of External Affairs, (202) 942-1640.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Board Meeting Agenda

### Open Session

                    1. Approval of the November 21, 2024, Board Meeting Minutes                          ( print page 101015)    

2. Monthly Reports

(a) Participant Report

(b) Investment Report

(c) Legislative Report

3. Quarterly Reports

(d) Vendor Risk Management

4. 2025 Board Calendar Review

### Closed Session

5. Information covered under 5 U.S.C. 552b (c)(10).

*Authority:*5 U.S.C. 552b (e)(1).                

Dated: December 9, 2024.

Dharmesh Vashee,

General Counsel, Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board.

[FR Doc. 2024-29340 Filed 12-12-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 101880-101881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29682]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

24 CFR Part 5

[Docket No. FR-6464-C-03]
RIN 2501-AE11

Adoption of 2020 Core Based Statistical Area Standards; 
Correction

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 
Development.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is 
correcting a final rule entitled, ``Adoption of 2020 Core Based 
Statistical Area Standards'' that published in the Federal Register on 
December 6, 2024.

DATES: Effective January 6, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: With respect to this technical 
correction, contact Allison Lack, Assistant General Counsel for 
Regulations, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th 
Street SW, Room 10238, Washington, DC 20410; telephone number 202-708-
1793 (this is not a toll-free number). HUD welcomes and is prepared to 
receive calls from individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as well 
as individuals with speech or communication disabilities. To learn more 
about how to make an accessible telephone call, please visit https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/telecommunications-relay-service-trs.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On December 6, 2024 (89 FR 96898), HUD 
published a final rule that adopts the 2020 Core Based Statistical Area 
(CBSA) standards as determined by the Office of Management and Budget's 
July 16, 2021, Federal Register notice for all HUD uses of CBSAs. The 
rule amended 24 CFR part 5 by adding a new subpart M. In reviewing the 
December 6, 2024, final rule, HUD identified an inadvertent error in 
Sec.  5.3001. Specifically, HUD incorrectly designated two paragraphs 
as paragraph (e) and two paragraphs as paragraph (f). This document 
corrects these errors.

Correction

    In FR Doc. 2024-28450, published December 6, 2024, at 89 FR 96898, 
the following corrections are made:

Sec.  5.3001  [Corrected]

0
1. On page 96901, in the first column, the second paragraph (e) is 
redesignated as paragraph (g), the second paragraph (f) is redesignated 
as paragraph (h), and

[[Page 101881]]

paragraphs (g) and (h) are redesignated as paragraph (i) and (j), 
respectively.

Aaron Santa Anna,
Associate General Counsel, Office of Legislation and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2024-29682 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
```
Exhibit 31.2

e-SMART TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Mary A. Grace,
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of e-Smart Technologies, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls
and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared; and

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my 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; and

c) 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.

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

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; and

b) 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: November 20, 2007



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Mary A. Grace      
|    |  | Mary A. Grace,         
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer
exv10w1



 






Exhibit 10.1




AMENDMENT TO THE ATMEL CORPORATION 2005 STOCK PLAN




1. Section 5(b)(xi) will be amended to read as follows:




     “to commence a 409A Exchange Offer in connection with each Option that had a per
share exercise price that was less than the fair market value of a share of the Company’s
common stock, as determined for purposes of Internal Revenue Code Section 409A, on the
Option’s grant date and that was unvested, in whole or in part, as of December 31, 2004
(notwithstanding Section 18(b) of the Plan), as described by Section 23 of the Plan;”



2. Section 5(b)(xii) will be added to the Plan and will read in its entirety as follows:




     “to make all other determinations deemed necessary or advisable for administering the
Plan.”



3. Section 23 will be added to the plan and read in its entirety as follows:




     “23. 409A Exchange Offer. The Administrator, may in its sole discretion,
offer to each Optionee who holds an Option with an original Grant Date Exercise Price that was
less than the original Grant Date fair market value, as determined for purposes of Section
409A of the Code, (each a “Discount Option”) one or more of the following choices with respect
to the portion of such Discount Option that was unvested on December 31, 2004 (such portion is
referred to as the “Eligible Discount Option”):




(a) If Optionee exercised any Eligible Discount Option (or portion thereof) in 2006,
then Optionee may elect to amend the eligible portion of each Eligible Discount Option such
that the Exercise Price of the Option will be increased to the fair market value, as
determined for purposes of Section 409A of the Code, of a share of the Company’s Common
Stock on the Option’s grant date.




(b) If Optionee was granted an Eligible Discount Option, but did not exercise any
Eligible Discount Option in 2006, then Optionee may be given one or more of the following
choices:




(i) Optionee may elect to amend each Eligible Discount Option to change the
option expiration date identified in the original grant agreement to a date that is
expected to constitute a fixed calendar year election for purposes of Section 409A of
the Code (the Administrator will have the discretion to choose to allow Optionees to
pick different calendar years for different portions of each Eligible Discount
Option); and/or




(ii) Optionee may elect to amend the eligible portion of each Eligible Discount
Option such that the Exercise Price of the Option will be increased to the fair market
value, as determined for purposes of Section 409A of the Code, of a share of the
Company’s Common Stock on the Option’s grant date.


4. Except as otherwise set forth herein, the terms of the Plan shall continue in full
force and effect.
Jermaine T. BALLARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2260

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed October 16, 2018

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Sean Kevin Gravel, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Andrea K. Totten, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, EVANDER and GROSSHANS, JJ., concur.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 9, 2016

p0906 

# Order

Clerk September 9, 2016

154278 & (19)

CITY OF SOUTHFIELD,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 154278

COA: 333970

Oakland CC: 2016

- 151947

- AA

JORDAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC,

and WORD OF FAITH CHRISTIAN CENTER

CHURCH,

Defendants

- Appellees.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED.

The app lication for leave to appeal the August 11, 2016 order of the Court of Appeals is

considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented

should be reviewed by this Court.
S.R., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-3303

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Rakim J. WATSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-4099

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed September 7, 2018

Kimberly Nolen Hopkins, Tampa, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

*1155Rakim Watson appeals his convictions for charges stemming from a drive-by shooting in which several individuals were wounded.1 He argues that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish his identity as the shooter and that the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial made when the court, in its preliminary instructions, inadvertently informed the jury that Watson had a prior conviction. We affirm.

Many of the individuals in this case have previously been involved with the criminal justice system. At trial, there were inconsistencies among the witnesses' accounts and in prior witness statements. While the identities of the shooters were disputed, it was undisputed that shots were fired from a vehicle Watson was in and several people were injured. Furthermore, at least one victim testified that Watson fired shots from the vehicle. Thus, there was sufficient evidence, despite the inconsistencies, to support Watson's convictions. *Cf.**Slater v. State*, 769 So.2d 512 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). Ultimately, it is within the jury's purview to make credibility determinations among conflicting testimony. *Id.* at 512 ("The validity of the [victim] identification testimony was for the jury."); *see also**Bradshaw v. State*, 744 So.2d 1095, 1097 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (explaining that evidence regarding defendant's "identity as the shooter was a question for the jury").

Further, we find the trial court's error in informing the jury that Watson had a prior conviction to be harmless under the circumstances of this case. During the preliminary instructions, the court read the charges Watson faced, including, "possession of a firearm by a convicted in-state-."2 Watson moved for a mistrial, and the court reserved ruling. However, Watson later chose to testify and freely stated that he had previously been convicted of several felonies. Thus, Watson himself placed his status as a convicted felon before the jury, rendering the court's inadvertent disclosure harmless. *Cf.**Wyatt v. State*, 641 So.2d 1336, 1338 (Fla. 1994) (finding trial court's mention of defendant's prior conviction during voir dire harmless where defendant later testified that he was a convicted felon).

AFFIRMED.

COHEN, C.J., WALLIS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.

1

Following a jury trial, Watson was found guilty of four counts of principal aggravated battery, one count of discharging a firearm from a vehicle, and one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

2

While the court stopped before saying the word "felon," the jury would likely have gathered that Watson had been previously convicted of a crime.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE O F FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME E XPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED JIMMY KIMBROUGH ,

Appellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 22

- 1367 LT Case No. 2009

- CF

- 21037

- A X STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Decision filed November 22, 2022 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County, Charles G. Crawford, Judge. Jimmy Kimbrough, Bushnell, pro se. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Robin A. Compton, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED.

EVANDER, EDWARDS and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Raouf Y. Halim, Chief
Executive Officer of Mindspeed Technologies, Inc., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to Annual
Report on Form 10-K/A of Mindspeed Technologies, Inc.; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report.



/S/ RAOUF Y. HALIMRaouf Y. HalimChief Executive Officer


Dated: December 14, 2012
December 27, 2002





PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


101 Centre Port Dr., Suite 250


Greensboro, NC 27409





Ladies and Gentlemen:





As of and for the period ended September 30, 2002, Oakwood Acceptance Corporation, LLC (the Company) has complied in all material respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth in
the Mortgage Bankers Association of Americas Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP).





As of and for
this same period, the Company had in effect a fidelity bond and an errors and omissions policy in the amount of $6,000,000 each.





/s/ Myles E. Standish

/s/ Robert A. SmithMyles E. Standish President and Chief Executive Officer

Robert A. Smith Executive Vice President  Financial Operations/s/ Suzanne H. Wood

/s/ Timothy J. GraffSuzanne H. Wood Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

Timothy J. Graff Executive Vice President  Customer Operations/s/ Jimmy S. Griffin

/s/ Derek M. SuretteJimmy S. Griffin Senior Vice President  Default Management, Oakwood Acceptance Corporation, LLC

Derek M. Surette Vice President and Controller  Oakwood Acceptance Corporation, LLC







---




Report of Independent Accountants





December 17, 2002





To the Board of Directors


of Oakwood Acceptance Corporation, LLC





We have examined
managements assertion about Oakwood Acceptance Corporation, LLCs (the Company) compliance with the minimum servicing standards identified in the Mortgage Bankers Association of Americas Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers(USAP) as of and for the year ended September 30, 2002 included in the accompanying management assertion. Management is responsible for the Companys compliance with those minimum servicing standards. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on managements assertion about the entitys compliance based on our examination.





Our
examination was made in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the minimum servicing
standards and performing such other procedures, as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Companys compliance with the minimum servicing standards.





In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company complied
with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended September 30, 2002 is fairly stated, in all material respects.





/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Cyrus Boga, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Tremont Fair, Inc. (the “Company”) certify that:





1.  I have reviewed the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company;





2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report 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 with respect to the period covered by this annual report; and





3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the period presented in this annual report.





Date:  April 15, 2011





/s/ Cyrus Boga


Cyrus Boga


Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
Order entered September 21, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00552-CV

WWLC INVESTMENT, L.P., Appellant

V.

SORAB MIRAKI, Appellee

On Appeal from the 471st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. NO. 471-06552-2019

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s September 18, 2020 motion for an extension 

of time to file its brief on the merits. We GRANT the motion and extend the time 

to October 14, 2020.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL

JUSTICE
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 31, 2015

p0323

Order 

Clerk

March 31, 2015

149133(18)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 149133

COA: 320031

Oceana CC: 05-005169-FC

LORI ANNE CHRISTMANN,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s October 28, 

2014 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
EXHIBIT
32





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 Delta Mutual, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Daniel R. Peralta,
Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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 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; and (2) The information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of
operations of the Company.





/s/ Daniel R. PeraltaDaniel
      R. PeraltaChief
      Executive Officer and Principal Financial
  Officer




July
21, 2010
Pauline Rae CAPUANO, Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s), v. Zoraida Catano JARAMILLO, Appellee(s)/Respondent(s),

CASE NO.: 3D18-1915

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

OCTOBER 18, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.