alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Terry D. ELLISON, Jr., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-1629

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 29, 2019

Robert David Malove of the Law Office of Robert David Malove, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Petitioner.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Amanda D. Stokes, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

In the instant petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, Terry Ellison, Jr. claims his appellate counsel failed to file a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to preserve a sentencing error-that his scoresheet improperly included an "adult-on-minor sex offense" multiplier. He argues that the inclusion of this multiplier effectively doubled the sentencing points. We determine that this claim may be raised in the instant petition, *see, e.g.,* *Marshall v. State* , 241 So.3d 969 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), and grant the petition.

Petitioner correctly contends that his scoresheet was incorrect. The "adult-on-minor sex offense" multiplier in section 921.0024(1)(b), Florida Statutes, applies only to certain offenses listed in the statute. Petitioner's offense, unlawful sexual activity under section 794.05, Florida Statutes, is not a listed offense. Therefore, the multiplier did not apply to Petitioner as a matter of law, and appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to move to correct the sentence.

This scoresheet error was not harmless. The record does not show that the trial court "would-have-imposed" the same sentence using a correct scoresheet. *See* *Sanders v. State* , 35 So.3d 864, 870-71 (Fla. 2010) ; *Ray v. State* , 987 So.2d 155, 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). Petitioner was sentenced to 153 months in prison, which was the lowest permissible sentence under the incorrect scoresheet. Although this sentence falls within the permissible range under a corrected scoresheet, the trial court made no statement that it would have otherwise imposed the same sentence absent the scoresheet error.

Accordingly, we vacate Petitioner's sentence and remand for a new sentencing proceeding using a corrected scoresheet. *See* *Anderson v. State* , 988 So.2d 144, 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) ("[W]here a second appeal would be redundant or unnecessary, it is appropriate to simply grant petitioner the relief to which he would have been entitled had the issue been raised in the original appeal.").

PETITION GRANTED .

Wetherell, Bilbrey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
# C_2019035EN.01000501.xml

| 28.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Liguria — Italy) — Amt Azienda Trasporti e Mobilità SpA and Others v Atpl Liguria — Agenzia regionale per il trasporto pubblico locale SpA, Regione Liguria

(Case C-328/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Public procurement - Review procedures - Directive 89/665/EEC - Article 1(3) - Directive 92/13/EEC - Article 1(3) - Right to bring proceedings subject to the condition that a tender was submitted in a procurement procedure))

(2019/C 35/06)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo Regionale per la Liguria

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Amt Azienda Trasporti e Mobilità SpA, Atc Esercizio SpA, Atp Esercizio Srl, Riviera Trasporti SpA, Tpl Linea Srl

Defendants: Atpl Liguria — Agenzia regionale per il trasporto pubblico locale SpA, Regione Liguria

Operative part of the judgment

Both Article 1(3) of Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, as amended by Diretive2007/66/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007, and Article 1(3) of Council Directive 92/13/EEC of 25 February 1992 coordinating the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of Community rules on the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors, as amended by Directive 2007/66, must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which does not allow economic operators to bring an action against the decisions of a contracting authority relating to a tendering procedure in which they have decided not to participate on the ground that the legislation applicable to that procedure made the award to them of the contract concerned very unlikely.

However, it is for the competent national court to make a detailed assessment, taking account of all the relevant information characterising the context of the case brought before it, as to whether the application of that legislation in practice is liable to affect the right of the economic operators concerned to the right to effective judicial protection.

---

(1)  OJ C 309, 18.9.2017.

---
---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sound Revolution
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended November 30, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.

|Dated: January 16, 2007 | /s/ Penny Green                                           
|----------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------
|                        | Penny Green                                               
|                        | President, Chief Executive Officer,                       
|                        | Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting
      Office

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 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 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40833 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. GRABIEL TORRES-GARCIA, also known as V ictor-Jose Gomez-Garcia, also known as Miguel Antonio Aldana-Garcia Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:05-CR-2358-ALL
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and STEWART and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Grabiel Torres-Garcia appeals his 70-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction to illegal reentry into the United States following deportation. Torres-Garcia concedes that his prior convictions under Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11351.5, based on his possession for sale and purchase for sale of cocaine, were drug trafficking offenses within the meaning of U.S.S.G. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D July 22, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 06-40833

2 § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i) and that the district court did not plainly err in making a 16- level adjustment to his offense level under that Guideline. BecauseTorres-Garcia did not object tothe characterization ofthe offense in the district court, review is for plain error. See United States v. Ochoa-Cruz, 442 F.3d 865, 866-67 (5th Cir. 2006). “Plain error exists when: (1) there was an error; (2) the error was clear and obvious; and (3) the error affected the defendant’s substantial rights.” Id. at 866 (quotation marks omitted). Under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i), a 16-level increase is applied if the defendant
was deported after a felony conviction that is “a drug trafficking offense for which the sentence imposed exceeded 13 months.” In United Statesv. PalaciosQuinonez, 431 F.3d 471, 473-76 (5th Cir. 2005), the court determined that a purchase for purposes of sale of cocaine is a drug trafficking offense within the meaning of § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(i). Torres-Garcia admits that he pleaded guilty to that offense and that he received a sentence exceeding 13 months. Therefore, the district court did not plainly err in making the adjustment. The district court correctly calculated the guidelines range and did not abuse its discretion in imposing sentence at the bottom of the sentencing guidelines range. Therefore, the sentence was substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596-97 (2007). AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Horizon Lines Holding Corp. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending September 24, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Charles G. Raymond, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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.



|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|/s/    CHARLES G.
RAYMOND                                                             
|Charles G. Raymond President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

October 30, 2006
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 ECOtality, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jonathan R. Read, acting in the capacity as the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, H. Ravi Brar, acting in the capacity as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)     The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and 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.





/s/ Jonathan R. ReadJonathan R. ReadChief Executive OfficerMay 23, 2011/s/ H. Ravi BrarH. Ravi BrarChief Financial OfficerMay 23, 2011
Statement on the Drought

Jill Long Thompson, Board Member

Farm Credit Administration Board Meeting

July 12, 2012

U.S. farmers are facing the worst drought and crop conditions in a quarter of a century. The last 

year in which conditions were as serious and widespread was 1988. Compounding our 

concerns is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s forecast of a worsening 

situation for the remainder of the crop year.

Legislative changes in the federal crop insurance program have resulted in better risk 

management tools and a much higher participation rate. Additionally, by implementing a number 

of prudential changes since the 1980s, the System has become much stronger. These changes 

are reassuring. Even so, given the seriousness of the drought, as a Board Member, I have the 

responsibility to do all I can to ensure continued safety and soundness of the Farm Credit 

System. Earlier this week I met with our Chief Economist and Chief Operating Officer, and am 

pleased with the work that is already being done to assess the potential for losses. I have also 

asked for additional analysis and a more comprehensive briefing in the future, and thank Bill 

Hoffman, our COO, for his expedience in addressing these concerns.
Order entered July 13 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 15

- 00431

- CR

JAMES COX, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 283rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause N o. F11

- 59110

- T



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

other reason.

 The trial court shall first determin e whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appea l, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreov er, if appellant is indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whe ther retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact,

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the d ate

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS JUSTICE
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Dennis G. Dracup, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Language Line, 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 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 report;

4. The registrants 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 we 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 report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants 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 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; and

5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our 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 function):

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: May 15, 2006

|    |  |                                     
|--- |  | ------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Dennis G. Dracup                
|    |  | Dennis G. Dracup                    
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer and Director
# C_2017347EN.01002001.xml

| 16.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/20

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour administrative d’appel de Versailles (France) lodged on 10 July 2017 — Oeuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA) v Ministre de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation, Premier minister, Bionoor, Ecocert France, Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité (INAO)

(Case C-497/17)

(2017/C 347/26)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour administrative d’appel de Versailles

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Oeuvre d’assistance aux bêtes d’abattoirs (OABA)

Appellant:

Respondents: Ministre de l’agriculture et de l’alimentation, Premier ministre, Bionoor, Ecocert France, Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité (INAO)

Respondents:

Question referred

Question referred

Must the applicable rules of European Union law, deriving from, inter alia:

| — | Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, |
| --- | --- |

—

Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

| — | Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007, (1) the detailed rules for the implementation of which are laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008, (2) and |
| --- | --- |

—

Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007, (1) the detailed rules for the implementation of which are laid down by Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008, (2) and

1

2

| — | Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 (3) |
| --- | --- |

—

Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 (3)

3

be interpreted as permitting or prohibiting approval of the use of the European label ‘organic farming’ in relation to products derived from animals which have been slaughtered in accordance with religious rites without first being stunned, where such slaughter is conducted in accordance with the requirements laid down by Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009?

organic farming

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 (OJ 2007 L 189, p. 1).

1

(2)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control (OJ 2008 L 250, p. 1).

2

(3)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing (OJ 2009 L 303, p. 1).

3

---
Norris B. HAWKINS, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Appellee.

No. 1D18-1258

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 9, 2019

Norris B. Hawkins, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Kristen J. Lonergan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Appellant seeks review of (1) the order dismissing his September 2017 mandamus petition challenging the lien imposed on his inmate trust account for his filing of a February 2016 mandamus petition, and (2) the order imposing a lien on his inmate trust account for his filing of the September 2017 mandamus petition. We dismiss the appeal of the first order based on *Roberts v. State* , 172 So.3d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), and we affirm the second order based on *Ruggirello v. Jones* , 202 So.3d 935 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).

DISMISSED in part; AFFIRMED in part.

Lewis, Wetherell, and Winokur, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DYNAMIC ALERT LIMITED (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Audrey Reich, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: April 30, 2008
|--------------------



|By:/s/ Audrey Reich
|-------------------



| | Audrey ReichPresident/CEO and principal executive officer
| | ---------------------------------------------------------

---
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 294TH DISTRICT COURT OF VAN ZANDT COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 27th

day of February, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

IN THE INTEREST OF K. W. AND P. W., CHILDREN

NO. 12-14-00327-CV; Trial Court No. 13-00267

Opinion by James T. Worthen, Chief Justice.

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the 

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court 

below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for 

observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 8

th day of July, 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk