alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE of Louisiana v. Rufus James HAMPTON, III

No. 2018-KH-1393

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

December 3, 2018

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF CADDO**

PER CURIAM:

*1254Denied. 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 second or 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.

Crichton, J., recused.
Yvon AUGUSTIN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-469

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 19, 2018

Rachael E. Reese of O'Brien Hatfield, P.A., Tampa, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Marilyn Muir Beccue, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, BLACK, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
**Exhibit
      23.1**





**Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**





To
      the
      Board of Directors


Keryx
      Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.:





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration
      statements of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. and subsidiaries, a development
      stage company, of our reports dated March 7, 2006, with respect to the
      consolidated balance sheets of Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. as of December
      31,
      2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
      stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
      period ended December 31, 2005, and for the period from December 3, 1996 to
      December 31, 2005, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal
      control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, and the effectiveness
      of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which
      reports appear in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K of Keryx
      Biopharmaceuticals, Inc.





-
            Form
                S-8 dated February 5, 2001 (File No.
                333-55006)


-
            Form
                S-3 dated December 12, 2003 (File No.
                333-111143)


-
            Form
                S-3 dated March 16, 2004 (File No.
                333-113654)


-
            Form
                S-3 dated April 19, 2004 (File No.
                333-114593)


-
            Form
                S-3 dated September 29, 2004 (File No.
                333-119376)


-
            Form
                S-8 dated September 29, 2004 (File No.
                333-119377)


-
            Form
                S-3 dated July 11, 2005 (File No.333-126494)


-
            Form
                S-3 dated December 30, 2005 (File No.
                333-130809)








/s/  KPMG
      LLP





New
      York,
      New York


March
      7,
      2006
Thomas B. FELTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4820

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 3, 2019

Thomas B. Felton, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Brooke Moody, Attorney General, and Quentin Humphrey, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED . *See**Davis v. State* , 214 So. 3d 799 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).

Rowe, Bilbrey, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          26,154
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,957
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,274
<INVENTORY>                                     37,793
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               118,673
<PP&E>                                         185,194
<DEPRECIATION>                                 109,605
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 203,712
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,805
<BONDS>                                         61,490
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,690
<OTHER-SE>                                      77,963
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   203,712
<SALES>                                        134,899
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               141,462
<CGS>                                           95,517
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   95,517
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,057
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    75
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,908
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,980
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,774
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             11,206
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,206
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58


</TABLE>
Darrell BRIDGETT, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5070

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 11, 2018

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Lewis, Wetherell, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of AlphaRx, Inc. on Form 10-QSB/A for
the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, Marcel Urbanc, as chief financial officer of
AlphaRx, Inc., do 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
his knowledge:

      3.    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of
            the Exchange Act; and

      4.    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
            of AlphaRx, Inc.


/s/ Marcel Urbanc
-----------------
Marcel Urbanc
Chief Financial Officer
May 20, 2003


22
Angles R. OWENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1721

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed November 30, 2018

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See**Carbajal v. State*, 75 So. 3d 258 (Fla. 2011) ; *State v. King*, 426 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1982) ; *State v. Roby*, 246 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1971) ; *Shortridge v. State*, 884 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) ; *Desmond v. State*, 576 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) ; *Budd v. State*, 477 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) ; *Hillman v. State*, 410 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982) ; *McMillan v. State*, 832 So. 2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) ; *Harris v. State*, 789 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) ; *Hart v. State*, 761 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) ; *Freeny v. State*, 621 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).

KHOUZAM, MORRIS, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersignedcertifies that this periodic report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and thatinformation contained in this periodic report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of RadView Software Ltd.

 
| Date:  August 12, 2003 |                                   |
|-----------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                        | /s/ ILAN  KINREICH                     |   |
|                        | Ilan Kinreich                          |
|                        | President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|                        |                                   |
|                        |                                   |
| Date:  August 12, 2003 |                                   |
|                        | /s/  CHRISTOPHER DINEEN                |   |
|                        | Christopher Dineen                     |
|                        | Chief  Financial Officer               |

 

 

The foregoing certification if being furnished solely to accompany theReport pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed under theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated byreference into any filing of the Company after the date hereof, regardless of anygeneral incorporation language in such filing.

 

----
EXHIBIT 99.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
                   PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                       DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned  officers of
Creative  Vistas,  Inc., an Arizona  corporation  (the  "Company"),  does hereby
certify with respect to the Annual  Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the
year  ended  September  30,  2002 as filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission (the "10-KSB Report") that:

          As required by Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act,  within the 90 days
     prior  to the  filing  date of this  report,  the  Company  carried  out an
     evaluation  of  the  effectiveness  of  the  design  and  operation  of the
     Company's  disclosure controls and procedures.  This evaluation was carried
     out under  the  supervision  and with the  participation  of the  Company's
     management,  including the Company's Chief Executive Officer along with the
     Company's Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer.  Based upon
     that  evaluation,  the  Company's  Chief  Executive  Officer along with the
     Company's Chief Financial Officer  concluded that the Company's  disclosure
     controls  and  procedures  are  effective.  There have been no  significant
     changes in the Company's  internal  controls or in other factors that could
     significantly  affect internal controls  subsequent to the date the Company
     carried out its evaluation.

          Disclosure  controls and procedures are controls and other  procedures
     that are  designed to ensure that  information  required to be disclosed in
     Company  reports  filed or  submitted  under the  Exchange Act is recorded,
     processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
     Securities and Exchange  Commission's rules and forms.  Disclosure controls
     and  procedures  include  controls and  procedures  designed to ensure that
     information  required to be  disclosed in Company  reports  filed under the
     Exchange Act is accumulated and  communicated to management,  including the
     Company's   Chief  Executive   Officer  and  Chief  Financial   Officer  as
     appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Dated: December 30, 2002


/s/  Rudy R. Miller
------------------------
President


Dated: December 30, 2002


/s/  Mary A. Nance
------------------------
Treasurer
Daniel VALDEZ MENDOZA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1034

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 15, 2019

James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Andrew Mich, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

BERGER, LAMBERT and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31.1





Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 302)





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





I, Harry Bagot, certify that:





(1)      I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Nuclear Solutions, Inc., (Registrant).





(2)      Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;





(3)      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;





(4)      The registrants other certifying officers and I are 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 our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;





(b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





(c)  disclosed in this report any changes 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 quarterly report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





(5)      The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of 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 registrants 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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.





Date: September 17, 2012




By:
/s/ Harry BagotHarry BagotChief Executive Officer
Gilbert C. PIEROLA, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4232

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 09, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Upon consideration of the appellant's response to the court's order to show cause dated November, 21, 2018, this appeal is dismissed because a jury verdict, itself, is a nonappealable, nonfinal order. This dismissal is without prejudice for appellant to file a timely notice of appeal from the judgment or judgment and sentence when rendered.

LaROSE, C.J., and VILLANTI, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
Larry H. RUSSELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5337

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 28, 2019

Larry H. Russell, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, and Heather Flanagan Ross, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

Rowe, Osterhaus, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.
Thomas ABRAHAM O/B/O D. A., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. AGENCY FOR HEALTHCARE ADMINISTRATION, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4548

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Manuel RODRIGUEZ, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3099

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed November 6, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Blaise COOK, a/k/a Blaise Dana Cook, a/k/a Blaise Dana Peachey, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4038

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed December 14, 2018

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Deana K. Marshall, Special Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Johnny T. Salgado, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LaROSE, C.J., and VILLANTI and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
NO. 07-07-0337-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL A

AUGUST 20, 2007

______________________________

EX PARTE DAVID MARTINEZ

_________________________________

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 2004-490,673-C; HONORABLE LARRY B. “RUSTY” LADD, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, David Martinez, filed a notice of appeal from the trial court’s Order of

Contempt. By letter dated August 2, 2007, this Court directed Appellant to demonstrate

on or before August 13, 2007, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of

jurisdiction. Appellant did not respond.

The validity of a contempt order cannot be challenged by direct appeal. Ex parte

Williams, 690 S.W.2d 243, 243 n.1 (Tex. 1985). See also Texas Animal Health Com’n v.
2

Nunley, 647 S.W.2d 951, 952 (Tex. 1983); Metzger v. Sebek, 892 S.W.2d 20, 54

(Tex.App.–Houston [1st Dist.] 1994, writ denied), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 868, 116 S.Ct.

186, 133 L.Ed.2d 124 (1995). Consequently, this Court has no alternative but to dismiss

this appeal.

Patrick A. Pirtle

 Justice

Do not publish.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-1258

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

ICOS CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware

in case no. 05-CV-506, Judge Sue L. Robinson.

ON MOTION

Before LINN, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

ICOS Corporation moves for leave to file a corresponding brief on CD-ROM.

Vanderbilt University opposes. ICOS replies.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The motion is granted.

FOR THE COURT

MAY -1 2009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Date

cc:	Robert S. Brennen, Esq.

Kevin M. Flowers, Esq.

s19

Jan Horbaly

Clerk U 001trppa

THE

)Rrie

FED	CIRCU

s

IT -

MAY - 1 2009

JAN HOR8ALY

CLERK
Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
           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  Interactive  Motorsports  and
Entertainment  Corp.  (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March
31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, William R. Donaldson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.

May 15, 2006                               /s/ William R. Donaldson
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           William R. Donaldson
                                           Chief Financial Officer and
                                           Treasurer

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Interactive Motorsports and Entertainment Corp. and will be retained
by  Interactive  Motorsports  and  Entertainment  Corp.  and  furnished  to  the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause number: 01-19-00018-CV

Style: Lucrecia Mendia v. Fiesta Mart, L.L.C. 

Date motion filed*: June 19, 2019

Type of motion: Opposed Fourth Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Brief

Party filing motion: Appellant’s counsel Tina Z. Robbins

Document to be filed: Appellant’s Brief

Is appeal accelerated? No.

If motion to extend time:

Original due date: March 27, 2019

Number of extensions granted: 3 Current Due Date: June 17, 2019

Date Requested: July 2, 2019 (97 days from original due date and 15

days from current due date)

Ordered that motion is:

☒ Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: July 2, 2019.

 No further extensions of time will be granted absent extraordinary 

circumstances.

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

☒ Other: _Although this is appellant’s fourth extension request, it is the first request after 

the filing of the supplemental clerk’s record on June 4, 2019. Accordingly, appellant’s 

fourth motion for an extension of time to file her brief is granted until July 2, 2019, but 

counsel is warned that no further extensions will be granted absent extraordinary 

circumstances.____________________________________________________________

Judge’s signature: ___/s/ Laura C. Higley______

 x Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: ___June 25, 2019____