alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Opinion filed August 9, 2018

In The

Eleventh Court of Appeals 

___________

No. 11-18-00036-CR

___________

JERALD SHANE HART, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 244th District Court

Ector County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. C-17-0667-CR

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Based upon an open plea of guilty, the trial court convicted Appellant, Jerald 

Shane Hart, of the offense of felony driving while intoxicated. The trial court held 

a punishment hearing and assessed Appellant’s punishment at confinement for 

seventeen years. We dismiss the appeal.

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw. The 

motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously 
2

examines the record and applicable law and concludes that the appeal is frivolous. 

Counsel has provided Appellant with a copy of the brief, the motion to withdraw, 

and a form motion for pro se access to the appellate record. Counsel advised 

Appellant of his right to review the record and file a response to counsel’s brief.

Appellant has not filed a response.

1 Counsel also advised Appellant of his right to

file a petition for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal 

Appeals seeking review by that court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 48.4, 68.

Court-appointed counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967); Kelly v. State, 436 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2014); In re Schulman, 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); and Stafford v. 

State, 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). In addressing an Anders brief and 

pro se response, a court of appeals may only determine (1) that the appeal is wholly 

frivolous and issue an opinion explaining that it has reviewed the record and finds 

no reversible error or (2) that arguable grounds for appeal exist and remand the cause 

to the trial court so that new counsel may be appointed to brief the issues. Schulman, 

252 S.W.3d at 409; Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2005). Following the procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman, we have 

independently reviewed the record, and we agree that the appeal is without merit and 

should be dismissed. See Schulman, 252 S.W.3d at 409. Based upon a review of 

the record, we agree with counsel that no arguable grounds for appeal exist.2

 

1This court granted Appellant more than thirty days in which to exercise his right to file a response 

to counsel’s brief.

2We note that Appellant has a right to file a petition for discretionary review pursuant to TEX. R.

APP. P. 68.
3

The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed. 

PER CURIAM

August 9, 2018

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Willson, J.,

Bailey, J., and Wright, S.C.J.

3

Willson, J., not participating.

 

3

Jim R. Wright, Senior Chief Justice (Retired), Court of Appeals, 11th District of Texas at Eastland, 

sitting by assignment.
EXHIBIT 99.1

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  Interactive   Motorsports  and
Entertainment  Corp.  (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended
March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the Date
hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned certifies,  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  results  of  operations  of the
     Company.

Date: May 20, 2003        By:       /s/ William R. Donaldson
                          -----------------------------------------------
                          William R. Donaldson
                          Chairman and Chief Executive Officer


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.
# C_2023216EN.01000301.xml

| 19.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/3

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 27 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — L Fund v Finanzamt D

(Case C-537/20, (1) L Fund)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 63 TFEU - Free movement of capital - Corporate income tax - Taxation of income from immovable property situated within the territory of a Member State - Difference in treatment between resident funds and non-resident funds - Exemption for resident funds only - Comparability of situations - Taking into account of the tax system of investors - None - Justification - Need to preserve the coherence of the national tax system - Need to preserve a balanced distribution of the power of taxation between Member States - None)

(2023/C 216/03)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: L Fund

Defendant: Finanzamt D

in the presence of: Bundesministerium der Finanzen

Operative part of the judgment

Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State which makes non-resident specialised property funds partially liable to corporate income tax in respect of the income from property which they receive in the territory of that Member State, whereas resident specialised property funds are exempted from that tax.

---

(1)  OJ C 19, 18.1.2021.

---
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway, J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk May 28, 2010

d0525 

# Order

May 28, 2010

138323(59)

DIANE GADIGIAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 138323 COA: 279540 Wayne CC: 06-621978-NO CITY OF TAYLOR, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for cl arification of this Court’s April 16, 2010 order is considered, and it is GRANTED. The April 16, 2010 or der is amended to read as
follows:

By order of November 19, 2009, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals was granted. On order of the Court, leave to appeal having been gran ted and the briefs of the parties having been considered, we VACATE our order of November 19, 2009. Pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we AFFIRM the result reached by the Court of Appeals in light of our decision
in Robinson v City of Lansing , 486 Mich ___ (Docke t No. 138669, decided April 8, 2010), which held that th e “two-inch rule” of MCL 691.1402a applies only to “county” highways. Th e parties to this case did not dispute that the road at issue is not a “county” highway. Therefore, in light of our
decision in Robinson , the two-inch rule does not apply to this case. We thus VACATE the opinion of the Court of Appeals because its analysis is dictum given our determination in Robinson that MCL 691.1402a applies only to “county” highways . We REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for further proceedings co nsistent with this order and Robinson

. We do not retain jurisdiction.
STATE of Louisiana v. Joshua THOMAS

NO. 2018-KH-1941

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 18, 2019

WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Petitioner has not demonstrated that he sought review in the court(s) below before filing in this Court nor shown the "extraordinary circumstances" that would justify bypassing that level of review. La.S.Ct.R. X § 5(b).
1957.

#### Scott *v.*The State.

Accusation of gaming, from city court of Nashville — Judge Peeples. May 15, 1909.

Hill, C. J.

1. The motion to quash the accusation because there was no evidence submitted by the State in support of the offense as charged in the accusation was properly overruled. This was a question for the jury, and not for the court.

2. Where the accusation charged that the accused “did play and bet for money at a game played with cards called ‘skin,’” and one witness described to the jury the game of cards that he saw the defendant playing, and another witness testified that he was familiar with the game of cards called “skin,” and that the game played by the defendant as described by the first witness was the game of “skin,” the jury were authorized to conclude that the particular game of cards as described in the indictment called “skin” was the game played by the defendant.

3. After a criminal case has been submitted to the jury and they have returned into court with their verdict, and have entered the jury box for the purpose of delivering the verdict to the court, the fact that one of the jurors did not enter the box with the others, but stood in the court-room in the presence of the judge and near the other members of the jury while the verdict was being received, did not constitute such a separation of the jury pending the trial of the case as would be presumptively harmful to the defendant; and where such technical separation of the juror from the other jurors occurred in the presence of the defendant and he made no objection to it at the time, it will be considered that he waived this trivial irregularity, and it will not entitle him to another trial. *Waller*v. *State,*2 *Ga. App.*636 (58 S. E. 1106). *Judgment affirmed.*

*568Submitted July 14, —

Decided July 31, 1909.

*Hendriclcs & Christian,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. H. Gary, solicitor,*contra.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - products_maps(1)
              - products_publications(5)
              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)

## By Location

              - alabama(9)
              - alaska(84)
              - arizona(29)
              - arkansas(5)
              - california(117)
              - colorado(35)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - connecticut(6)
              - delaware(3)
              - district of columbia(4)
              - florida(11)
              - georgia(8)
              - guam(2)
              - hawaii(76)
              - idaho(16)
              - illinois(3)
              - indiana(6)
              - iowa(7)
              - kansas(2)
              - (-)kentucky(7)
              - louisiana(6)
              - maine(8)
              - maryland(9)
              - massachusetts(14)
              - michigan(9)
              - minnesota(6)
              - mississippi(7)
              - missouri(8)
              - montana(21)
              - nebraska(6)
              - nevada(26)
              - new hampshire(4)
              - new jersey(8)
              - new mexico(23)
              - new york(9)
              - north carolina(10)
              - north dakota(11)
              - ohio(1)
              - oklahoma(4)
              - oregon(19)
              - pennsylvania(11)
              - puerto rico(5)
              - rhode island(6)
              - south carolina(10)
              - south dakota(41)
              - tennessee(4)
              - texas(22)
              - u.s. virgin islands(2)
              - utah(42)
              - vermont(1)
              - virginia(13)
              - washington(31)
              - west virginia(3)
              - wisconsin(14)
              - wyoming(17)

## By Year

Featured Films and Shorts        April 8, 2024        USGS Northeast Region: The Short Story

publication        February 15, 2023        Generalized additive model estimation of no-flow fractions and L-moments to support flow-duration curve quantile estimation using selected probability distributions for bay and estuary restoration in the Gulf States

map        January 1, 1953        Coal beds of the Troublesome quadrangle, Breathitt, Knott, and Perry Counties, Kentucky

publication        January 1, 2000        Sources, instream transport, and trends of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment in the lower Tennessee River basin, 1980-96

publication        January 1, 1983        Evaluation of ground-water quality data from Kentucky

publication        January 1, 1906        Geology and mineral resources of part of the Cumberland Gap coal field, Kentucky

publication        January 1, 1919        The oil fields of Allen County, Kentucky, with notes on the oil geology of adjoining counties
Theodie WILLIAMS, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4821

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 10, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

This proceeding is dismissed because of the petitioner's failure to satisfy this court's December 6, 2018, fee order.

LaROSE, C.J., and NORTHCUTT and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.
Edward Ruiz MURGUIA, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4263

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 22, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Granted.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

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-K for the period ending September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, Michael M. Lee, as chief executive
officer of AlphaRx, Inc., does 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:

|1. | This 10-K report fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act; and                                                                 
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                       
|2. | The information contained in this 10-K report fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of
      operations of AlphaRx, Inc.

/s/ Michael M. LeeMichael M. Lee President & Chief
Executive Officer December 31, 2010

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

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.

November 27, 2019

a1120 

# Order

Clerk November 27, 2019

157032

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 157032

COA: 340420

Jackson CC: 16

- 004640

- FH

RYAN WILLIAM SCHURZ,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of July 3, 2018, the application for leave to appeal the November 28,

2017 order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in People

v Dixon

- Bey (Docket No. 156746). On order of the Court, leave to appeal having been

denied in Dixon

- Bey on July 29, 2019, 504 Mich ___ (2019), the applicat ion is again

considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we

REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted.
Joseph THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1933

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7381

J. RANDY DEER, a/k/a John Randy Deer,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PARKER EVATT, Commissioner, SCDC; P. DOUGLAS

TAYLOR, L.C.I. Warden; LAURIE BESSINGER,

K.C.I. Warden; J. D. WESSINGER, M.S.U. Deputy

Warden,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(CA-94-597-3-18-BC)

Submitted: January 18, 1996 Decided: February 1, 1996

Before HAMILTON and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

J. Randy Deer, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas McKay, Jr., Daniel Roy

Settana, Jr., MCKAY, MCKAY, HENRY & FOSTER, P.A., Columbia, South

Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate

judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Deer v. Evatt,

No. CA-94-597-3-18-BC (D.S.C. Aug. 18, 1995). See also Sandin v.

Connor, ___ U.S. ___, 63 U.S.L.W. 4601, 4605 (U.S. June 19, 1995)

(No. 93-1911) (actions that do not pose "atypical and significant

hardship on the inmate in relation to the ordinary incidents of

prison life" do not state a constitutional claim). 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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30992]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 30, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 17, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 1109 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-888 K2025-889.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30992 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
# C_2020061EN.01005702.xml

| 24.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/57

---

Action brought on 30 December 2019 – Sumol + Compal Marcas v EUIPO – Jacob (Dr. Jacob’s essentials)

(Case T-879/19)

(2020/C 61/73)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Sumol + Compal Marcas, SA (Carnaxide, Portugal) (represented by: A. de Sampaio, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Ludwig Manfred Jacob (Heidesheim, Germany)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark Dr. Jacob’s essentials – Application for registration No 13 742 903

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 October 2019 in Case R 1025/2019-1

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO and the other party to the proceedings to pay the costs.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 129268 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 129268 

 COA: 259475 

Genesee CC: 89-040498-FC 

TERRENCE L. LUSTER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 24, 2005 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

d1121 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

November 29, 2005 

Clerk
Curtis Wayne HODGES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-540

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 12, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.