alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 1 of 27 PageID 33
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 2 of 27 PageID 34
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 3 of 27 PageID 35
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 4 of 27 PageID 36
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 5 of 27 PageID 37
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 6 of 27 PageID 38
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 7 of 27 PageID 39
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 8 of 27 PageID 40
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 9 of 27 PageID 41
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 10 of 27 PageID 42
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 11 of 27 PageID 43
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 12 of 27 PageID 44
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 13 of 27 PageID 45
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 14 of 27 PageID 46
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 15 of 27 PageID 47
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 16 of 27 PageID 48
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 17 of 27 PageID 49
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 18 of 27 PageID 50
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 19 of 27 PageID 51
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 20 of 27 PageID 52
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 21 of 27 PageID 53
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 22 of 27 PageID 54
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 23 of 27 PageID 55
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 24 of 27 PageID 56
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 25 of 27 PageID 57
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 26 of 27 PageID 58
Case 3:03-cv-02912-D Document 18 Filed 02/20/04 Page 27 of 27 PageID 59
STATE of Louisiana v. Grover D. CANNON

NO. 2019-KK-0518

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 30, 2019

Stay denied; writ denied.
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002 (18 U.S.C.  350), the undersigned, Joseph Skeehan, Chief Executive Officer of JMG Exploration, Inc. (the "Company") has executed this certification in connection with the  filing  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  of the  Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 (the "Report").  The undersigned certifies that:  (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 operation of the Company.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 26th day of July 2007.   JMG EXPLORATION, INC.  /s/   Joseph Skeehan Name: Joseph Skeehan Title: Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATIONS



I, Hugh Panero, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of XM Satellite Radio 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. The registrants other certifying officer 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 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 officer 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 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: March 30, 2004



|    |  |                                                  
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|    | 
|By: |  | /s/ Hugh Panero                                  
|    |  |                                                  
|    |  | Hugh Panero President and Chief Executive Officer
Ronald Tracy PAYNE, DOC #949528, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1648

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 1, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
CLEARWATER AVIATION, INC., and Douglas Paton, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Stephen G. Fox, Deceased Appellants, v. NEW HEIGHTS AVIATION, LLC, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2717

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 29, 2019.

FLORIDA DECISIONS WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Affirmed.
Antione HASTIE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-3159

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 3, 2019]

Antione Hastie, Fort Lauderdale, pro se.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jeanine M. Germanowicz, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

Antione Hastie appeals the trial court's denial of his Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. We reverse and remand for the trial court to remove the violent career criminal (VCC) designation from Hastie's grand theft convictions.

On November 24, 2015, Hastie entered a negotiated plea of no contest in seven criminal cases. He was designated a habitual felony offender (HFO) and a VCC and was sentenced to fifteen years in prison with a ten-year mandatory minimum pursuant to his VCC designation. For the VCC predicate, the trial court used a previous burglary conviction where Hastie was a juvenile but was tried and convicted as an adult.

On July 26, 2018, Hastie filed the subject Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence and argued that he could not be sentenced as a VCC for his grand theft convictions because they are not enumerated offences in the VCC statute and because his juvenile burglary conviction was wrongfully used to impose a VCC sentence. The lower court denied Hastie's motion.

The trial court correctly considered Hastie's juvenile burglary offense for his VCC designation because he was tried and convicted as an adult. *See generally* *Reed v. State* , 880 So.2d 1269 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (explaining that a juvenile's adult conviction can be considered for habitual offender sentencing). However, Hastie's VCC sentences for his grand theft convictions are illegal.

The VCC statute states, in relevant part:

> (d) "Violent career criminal" means a defendant for whom the court must impose imprisonment ... if it finds that:

> 1. The defendant has previously been convicted as an adult three more times for an offense in this state or other qualified offense that is:

> a. Any forcible felony ...

> b. Aggravated stalking ...

> c. Aggravated child abuse ...

> d. Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult ...

> e. Lewd or lascivious battery ...

> f. Escape ...

> g. A felony violation of chapter 790 involving the use or possession of a firearm. ...

> 3. The primary felony offense for which the defendant is to be sentenced is a felony enumerated in subparagraph 1....

§ 775.084, Fla. Stat. (2015).

Grand theft is not enumerated as a primary or predicate offense; therefore, Hastie's VCC sentences for those convictions should be vacated. *See* *Bynes v. State* , 127 So.3d 556, 557 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ("As the State concedes, grand theft clearly does not qualify for VCC sentencing."). We reverse and remand for the *1039ministerial entry of a corrected sentence at which Hastie need not be present.

*Reversed and remanded for resentencing.*

Gross, Forst and Klingensmith, JJ., concur.
Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 32 Filed 03/28/02 Page 1 of 2 PageID 140
Case 3:00-cv-00022-P Document 32 Filed 03/28/02 Page 2 of 2 PageID 141
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

STEVEN WAYNE METCALF, )

ID # 90-109-07, )

Petitioner, )

vs. ) No. 3:05-CV-0695-N

 )

DAVID BURNS, Kaufman County Sheriff, )

Respondent. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the

Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings

and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED September 26, 2005.

 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

 Case 3:05-cv-00695-N Document 6 Filed 09/27/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 20
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO OF ALLIED SECURITY HOLDINGS LLC PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Allied Security Holdings LLC (the ‘‘Company’’) for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ‘‘Report’’), William C. Whitmore, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and William A. Torzolini, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his 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. |

/s/ William C. Whitmore, Jr.    Name: William C. Whitmore, Jr.Title: Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer and ManagerDate: August 14, 2007

/s/ William A. Torzolini                        Name: William A. TorzoliniTitle: Senior Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerDate: August 14, 2007

----
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 33 Filed 09/24/01 Page 1 of 4 PageID 82
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 33 Filed 09/24/01 Page 2 of 4 PageID 83
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 33 Filed 09/24/01 Page 3 of 4 PageID 84
Case 3:00-cv-02377-N Document 33 Filed 09/24/01 Page 4 of 4 PageID 85
Russell Alan CROSIER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-869

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 30, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

 §

v. § CRIMINAL NOS. 3:04-CR-114-S

 § 3:19-CR-202-S

 §

ALPHONZO DRAWHORN §

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On this day, pursuant to the referral of District Judge Karen Gren Scholer, a hearing was 

held to determine Defendant Alphonzo Drawhorn’s present competence to stand trial. Defendant 

appeared in person and through counsel, Rachel Taft, and announced ready to proceed. The 

Government appeared by and through Assistant United States Attorney Melanie Smith, and 

likewise announced ready to proceed. 

Although given the opportunity to do so, neither the Government nor Defendant 

Drawhorn offered any evidence or argument. Moreover, neither the Government nor Defendant 

objected to the report of the psychological evaluation of Defendant Drawhorn submitted by the 

Bureau of Prisons, which is dated Sept 27, 2019, and was filed on October 4, 2019 (“Report”), 

Doc. 15. 

FINDINGS

Having reviewed and accepted the Report, the Court fails to find by a preponderance of 

the evidence that Defendant Drawhorn is suffering from a mental disease or defect that would 

render him mentally incompetent to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings 

against him or to assist properly in his defense. See 18 U.S.C. § 4241(d). Indeed, the Court 

affirmatively finds that Defendant Drawhorn is able to understand the nature and extent of the 

Case 3:04-cr-00114-S Document 68 Filed 10/11/19 Page 1 of 2 PageID 523
proceedings against him and is able to assist properly in his defense. Thus, the Court finds 

Defendant Drawhorn is competent to proceed to the adjudication of the allegations that he has 

violated his conditions of supervised release.

RECOMMENDATION

For the reasons stated herein, it is recommended that the Court adopt the findings of the 

Report, Doc. 15, and find that Defendant Drawhorn understands the nature and consequences of 

the proceedings, is able to assist properly in his defense, and is competent to proceed in this case.

SIGNED October 11, 2019.

Case 3:04-cr-00114-S Document 68 Filed 10/11/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID 524
Akeem Simee JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1307

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 9, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>


                                                                EXHIBIT 20(b)


                    ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE


                          Officer's Certificate
                          ---------------------

     I, George E. Borst, President and Chief Executive Officer of Toyota Motor
Credit Corporation ("TMCC"), hereby certify as follows:

     (a)  a review of the activities of TMCC as Servicer under the 1997-A SUBI
Servicing Supplement (the "Agreement") dated September 1, 1997 among TMTT,
Inc., as Titling Trustee, TMCC, as Servicer, and U.S. Bank National
Association, as Trust Agent, for the year ended September 30, 2000, and of the
performance of the Servicer under the Agreement has been made under my
supervision;

     (b)  to the best of my knowledge, based on such review, no default has
occurred by the Servicer under the Agreement throughout such period; and

     (c)  throughout such period the Servicer has maintained in full force and
effect the Contingent and Excess Liability Insurance Policies required pursuant
to Section 4.12 of the Agreement.



Date:  December 20, 2000                         /S/ GEORGE E. BORST
                                        ------------------------------------
                                                     George E. Borst
                                                      President and
                                                  Chief Executive Officer
LOAN AGREEMENT

This Agreement (the Agreement), dated May 30, 2008, is made by and between Sound Revolution Inc., a Delaware corporation (Sound Revolution), Penny Green, Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of the Company (Green), and Bacchus Entertainment Ltd. (Bacchus), a company owned by Green.

Now therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereby agree as follows:

|1. | As of May 30, 2008:                                                                                                                                                                                             
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  
|   | a.                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|  
|   | b.                                                                                                                                                                                                              
|  
|2. | Bacchus hereby assigns to Green all monies now due and accruing due to it from Sound Revolution as of the date of this agreement, with power to sue for or otherwise collect the monies absolutely (the Loan).
|  
|3. | Green is to be indemnified by Bacchus from all costs and charges of any kind incurred in the collection of these monies, or otherwise in connection with them.                                                  
|  
|4. | No interest shall be charged on any outstanding balance of the Loan from March 1, 2008 onwards.                                                                                                                 
|  
|5. | The full amount of the Loan is payable on demand to Green.                                                                                                                                                      
|  
|6. | Sound Revolution shall have the option to pay out the outstanding balance of the Loan and interest in full to Green at any time without a penalty.                                                              
|  

This Agreement replaces the agreement between Sound Revolution, Bacchus and Green dated August 31, 2004 as amended on November 30, 2004, June 14, 2006, January 1, 2007, June 30, 2007, and January 1, 2008.

In witness whereof this Agreement has been executed by or on behalf of the parties hereto, as an instrument under seal as of the date first above written.

Sound Revolution Inc.
     
     Bacchus Entertainment Ltd.By: /s/ Robin Ram
     
     By:/s/ Penny GreenRobin Ram
     Title: Chief Executive Officer
     
     Penny Green
      Title:  President/s/ Penny Green
                Penny Green


---
# C_2017347EN.01001701.xml

| 16.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 347/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 347/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Cluj (Romania) lodged on 9 August 2017 — IQ v JP

(Case C-478/17)

(2017/C 347/22)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunalul Cluj

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: IQ

Appellant:

Respondent: JP

Respondent:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the expression ‘the courts of a Member State having jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter’ which appears in Article 15 of the Brussels II Regulation (1) refer equally to courts hearing the case at first instance and to courts of appeal? It is important to know whether the case may be transferred, on the basis of that provision, to a court better placed to hear it if the court having jurisdiction and being asked to transfer the case to a better placed court is a court of appeal, while the better placed court is a court of first instance. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the expression ‘the courts of a Member State having jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter’ which appears in Article 15 of the Brussels II Regulation (1) refer equally to courts hearing the case at first instance and to courts of appeal? It is important to know whether the case may be transferred, on the basis of that provision, to a court better placed to hear it if the court having jurisdiction and being asked to transfer the case to a better placed court is a court of appeal, while the better placed court is a court of first instance.

1

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, how is the court having jurisdiction and transferring the case to a better placed court to deal with the judgment at first instance? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, how is the court having jurisdiction and transferring the case to a better placed court to deal with the judgment at first instance?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 (OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1).

1

---
Matthew Samuel STRATIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3916

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2018341EN.01000201.xml

| 24.9.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 341/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 341/2

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 12 July 2018 — (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Svilengrad — Bulgaria) — Criminal proceedings against Daniela Pinzaru, Robert-Andrei Cirstinoiu

(Case C-707/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Control of cash entering or leaving the European Union - Regulation (EC) No 1889/2005 - Failure to comply with the obligation to declare - Penalties laid down by national law - Confiscation by the State of the undeclared sum - Custodial sentence - Fine in the amount of twice the undeclared sum - Proportionality))

(2018/C 341/02)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Rayonen sad Svilengrad

Parties to the criminal proceedings in the main proceedings

Daniela Pinzaru, Robert-Andrei Cirstinoiu

Operative part of the order

Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1889/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on controls of cash entering or leaving the Community must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which, as a penalty for failure to comply with the obligation to declare laid down in Article 3 of that regulation, imposes, first, confiscation by the State of the undeclared sum and, second, a custodial sentence of up to six years or a fine in the amount of twice the undeclared sum.

---

(1)  OJ C 94, 12.3.2018.

---