alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Antwan T. MANN, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

Case No. 5D19-430

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Opinion filed April 26, 2019

Antwan T. Mann, Crawfordville, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kaylee D. Tatman, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Antwan T. Mann seeks a belated appeal of an order retroactively finding him competent to proceed to trial.1 Mann was originally charged with aggravated battery and felony battery. During the course of representation, Mann's lawyer filed a suggestion of mental incompetence to stand trial. The trial court ordered an examination to determine whether Mann was competent to proceed to trial. The evaluation concluded that while Mann had various mental health issues, he was competent to proceed. At trial, Mann was convicted of two counts of felony battery. The trial court later dismissed one count based on double jeopardy and sentenced Mann as a prison release reoffender on the remaining felony battery count.

On direct appeal, Mann argued that the trial court failed to conduct a hearing and enter an order determining his competency. The State conceded error. This Court remanded for the trial court to make a retroactive competency determination, if possible. *See**Mann v. State*, 254 So.3d 1131 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). On remand, the trial court conducted the requisite hearing and entered a nunc pro tunc order finding that Mann was competent to proceed at the time of trial.2 Mann did not timely appeal that order, and he now seeks a belated appeal.

*642As observed in *Pamphile v. State*, 260 So.3d 1185, 1185-86 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018), Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b) does not authorize this Court to independently review an order on competency. However, Mann and those in a similar position may challenge a finding of competency through a timely petition for writ of certiorari. *See**State v. Pettis*, 520 So.2d 250, 253 (Fla. 1988) (noting cases in which "the district courts of appeal have granted common law certiorari to quash nonappealable interlocutory orders in criminal cases which departed from the essential requirements of law" (citations omitted) ). However, there is no belated certiorari review. *See**Owings v. State*, 181 So.3d 588, 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).3

PETITION DENIED.

COHEN, BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

1

While Mann's petition is arguably deficient, we elect to address its merits because this is a recurring issue. *E.g.*, *Pleasures II Adult Video, Inc. v. City of Sarasota*, 833 So.2d 185, 186 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (addressing issue that would likely reoccur).

2

Counsel represented Mann at that proceeding.

3

Mann's allegations, even if timely, were inadequate to warrant certiorari review. *See* Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(4)(F)(i) (requiring specific allegations "that constitute the basis for entitlement").
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 Smartmetric, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Colin Hendrick, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 operations of the
      Company.





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or
after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such
filing.




Dated: May
      15, 2009
                  By:
                  /s/ Colin
      HendrickColin
      HendrickPresident
      (Principal Executive Officer)
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 849 

To require the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the 

Central Intelligence Agency to conduct a study to identify supply chains 

critical to national security, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 18, 2021 

Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. KING) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence 

A BILL 

To require the Director of National Intelligence and the 

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency to conduct 

a study to identify supply chains critical to national 

security, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Supply Chain Vulner5 ability Assessment Act of 2021’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 849 IS

1 SEC. 2. STUDY ON SUPPLY CHAINS CRITICAL TO NATIONAL 

2 SECURITY. 

3 Not later than 180 days after the date of the enact4 ment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence and 

5 the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency shall joint6 ly— 

7 (1) complete a study— 

8 (A) to identify— 

9 (i) supply chains that are critical to 

10 the national security, economic security, or 

11 public health or safety of the United 

12 States; and 

13 (ii) important vulnerabilities in such 

14 supply chains; and 

15 (B) to develop recommendations for legis16 lative or administrative action to secure the 

17 supply chains identified under subparagraph 

18 (A)(i); and 

19 (2) submit to the congressional intelligence 

20 committees (as that term is defined in section 3 of 

21 the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 

22 3003)) the findings of the directors with respect to 

23 the study conducted under paragraph (1). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-82,771-01, WR-82,771-02, WR-82,771-03, WR-82,771-04 & WR-82,771-05

EX PARTE RODOLFO GARZA, Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR WRITS OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. 07-342, 07-343, 10-109, 10-110 & 10-111 

IN THE 130 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM MATAGORDA COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for writs of habeas corpus. Ex

parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of tampering

with evidence, three aggravated robberies, and two charges of engaging in organized criminal

activity. He was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment for tampering with evidence, and to thirty-five

years’ imprisonment in each of the remaining cases. He did not appeal his convictions. 

Applicant contends, among other things, that two of his sentences are illegal, and that counsel

was ineffective for allowing him to plead guilty and true in exchange for illegal sentences. We
2

remanded this application to the trial court for supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Trial counsel filed affidavits with the trial court. Based on the affidavits and testimony from

a live hearing, the trial court determined that the cases were part of a “package deal,” and Applicant’s

pleas were involuntary. Applicant is entitled to relief. Ex parte Huerta, 692 S.W.2d 681 (Tex. Crim.

App. 1985); Ex parte Cox, 482 S.W.3d 112 (Tex. Crim. App. 2016). 

Relief is granted. The judgments in Cause Nos. 07-342, 07-343, 10-109, 10-110, and 10-111 

in the 130 District Court of Matagorda County are set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the th

custody of the Sheriff of Matagorda County to answer the charges as set out in the indictments and

motions to adjudicate. The trial court shall issue any necessary bench warrant within 10 days after

the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: May 4, 2016

Do not publish
Office of Economics and Analytics

Chief – Giulia McHenry

Senior Deputy Chief – Wayne Leighton 

Deputy Chief for Economics – Catherine Matraves 

Deputy Chief – Donald Stockdale

Chief Economist – Johannes Bauer

Chief of Staff – Rachel Kazan

FCC Chief Data & Analytics Officer – Steven Rosenberg

Associate Chief, Wireline – Eric Ralph

Associate Chief, Media – Andrew Wise 

Associate Chief, Spectrum – Patrick DeGraba 

Associate Chief, Legal & Policy - Mark Montano 

Senior Economic Advisor – Evan Kwerel

Legal Advisor – Michelle Schaefer

Budget & Management Analyst – Amaryllis Flores

Front Office

Chief – Mary Lovejoy

Deputy, Legal – Gary Michaels

Deputy, Economics and Implementation - Martha Stancill

Associate Chief, Analysis & Implementation – Linda Sanderson

Associate Chief, Program Manager - Jill Goldberger

Assistant Chief, Legal – Kelly Quinn

Assistant Chief, Chief Counsel – Erik Salovaara

Chief – Chelsea Fallon

Deputy Division Chief – Jonathan McCormack

Auctions Division

Data Division

Economic Analysis Division

Industry Analysis Division

Chief – Emily Talaga

Deputy Chief – Eugene Kiselev

Associate Chief & Chief of Staff – Patrick Brogan

Associate Chief – Judith Dempsey

Associate Chief – Virginia Metallo

Associate Chief – Kim Makuch

Associate Chief – Aleks Yankelevich

Chief – Kenneth Lynch

Deputy Chief - Craig Stroup

Associate Chief & Chief of Staff - Suzanne Mendez

Associate Chief – Pramesh Jobanputra

Associate Chief – Ed Cureg
Freddie Lee GIDDENS, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3666

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 2, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 31, 2019

Freddie Lee Giddens, Jr., Crawfordville, pro se.

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

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WALLIS, HARRIS and SASSO, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT
    31.1
 
 CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO RULES 13a-14(a) AND 15d-14(a) UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002
 
 I, Donald
A. Gilles, certify that:
 
 1. I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2009, of Valley Commerce Bancorp;
  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
Rule 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 first fiscal quarter of 2009 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: May
15, 2009
  /s/ Donald A. GillesDonald
      A. GillesPresident
      and Chief Executive
Officer




31
Case 3:05-cv-01435-M Document 12 Filed 09/08/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 79
Case 3:05-cv-01780-M Document 6 Filed 11/09/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 14
PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Linda MARTIN, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.

No. 3D17-1983

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Paul W. BROWN v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES - Municipal Police Employees' Retirement System

NO. 2018-C-0102

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 2, 2018

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.

GENOVESE, J., would grant in part and remand for an award of attorney fees.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# 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:*                         January 30, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 13, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 598 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1147, K2025-1147.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-01914 Filed 1-29-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Exhibit
32





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





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of SFSB, Inc. (the
“Company”) each certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge, that the
Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009,
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and the information contained in that Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.





/s/ Philip E. LoganPhilip
      E. LoganChairman,
      President and Chief Executive OfficerMay
      14, 2009/s/ Sophie Torin
    WittelsbergerSophie
      Torin WittelsbergerVice-President
      and Chief Financial OfficerMay
      14, 2009





This
certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is
not being filed as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure document,
and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person for any reason other
than as specifically required by law.
1 C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Dwayne Rayshaun Wilson v. Empire Towing LLC and ATC Auto Storage LLC

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 8

- 0 1145

- CV

Trial court case number: 1 11 7 336

Trial court: County Civil Court at Law No. 2 of Harris County

A ppellant, Dwayne Rayshaun Wilson

, ha s filed a n otice of a ppeal of the trial

court’s final o rder signed on December 14 , 201 8

. The clerk’s record filed in this Court

includes his “ Unsworn Declaration of Inability to Pay .” See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 145(a) ; see also T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 502.3

. And, t he record filed in this Court does not r eflect that any motion to require appellant to pay costs or a ny contest to appellant ’ s declaration was filed. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P . 145 (a), (f)

. Accordingly, t he Clerk of this Court is directed to make an entry in this Court’s records that appellant i s allowed to proceed on appeal without payment of costs. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P. 145(a); T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 20.1.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Julie Countiss

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___ February 5, 2019

_
D.E. v. RUSSELL COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160924

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 9, 2018

Affirmed.
Antonio NICHOLS v. ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

CR-17-0089

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 6, 2017

Transferred to Sup. Ct.
Case 3:05-cr-00202-P Document 146 Filed 01/05/09 Page 1 of 2 PageID 801
Case 3:05-cr-00202-P Document 146 Filed 01/05/09 Page 2 of 2 PageID 802
Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation

Statement of Financial Condition

June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011

(unaudited)

June 30

2012

December 31

2011

Assets

Cash and Cash Equivalents $ 70,525,513 $ 1,100,764

Investments in U.S. Treasury Obligations 3,107,037,757 3,266,285,063

Accrued Interest Receivable 20,666,639 26,264,304

Premiums Receivable 43,104,000 98,699,000

Total Assets $ 3,241,333,909 $ 3,392,349,131

Liabilities and Insurance Fund

Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses $ 266,146 $ 385,325

Farm Credit Insurance Fund

 Allocated Insurance Reserves Accounts

 Allocated in 2011 (1) 0 221,851,220

 Unallocated Insurance Fund Balance 3,241,067,763 3,170,112,586

 Total Insurance Fund 3,241,067,763 3,391,963,806

Total Liabilities and Insurance Fund $ 3,241,333,909 $ 3,392,349,131

(1) On April 24, 2012, the Board authorized payment of $221,851,220 that had been allocated to the

 AIRAs at yearend 2011. The payments were made to accountholders in May, 2012.
Farm Credit System Insurance Corporation

Statement of Revenue and Expense

For the Period Ended June 30, 2012 and June 30, 2011

(unaudited)

Calendar Year To Date

June 30, 2012

Calendar Year To Date

June 30, 2011

Income

Premiums $ 43,135,952 $ 49,402,000

Interest Income on Investments 29,428,153 42,694,646

Total Income $ 72,564,105 $ 92,096,646

Expenses

Administrative Operating Expenses $ 1,608,928 $ 1,584,757

Total Expenses $ 1,608,928 $ 1,584,757

Net Income $ 70,955,177 $ 90,511,889

Statement of Changes in Insurance Fund 

For Period Ended June 30, 2012

(unaudited)

Balance at January 1, 2012 $ 3,391,963,806

Payment to AIRAs Accountholders (221,851,220)

Net Income 70,955,177

Balance at June 30, 2012 $ 3,241,067,763
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 Ironclad Performance Wear Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Eduard Jaeger, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

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

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


/s/ Eduard Jaeger
-----------------------
Eduard Jaeger
Chief Executive Officer
November 14, 2006
Case 3:05-cv-02162-H Document 28 Filed 02/13/07 Page 1 of 1 PageID 152
Case 3:05-cv-00865-N Document 6 Filed 07/29/05 Page 1 of 1 PageID 13
Jerell WHITE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-4677

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 22, 2019

Jerell White, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Barbara Debelius, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

Wolf, Wetherell, and Makar, JJ., concur.
EMBRACE HOME LOANS, INC. v. Linia Thomas BURL a/k/a Linia T. Burl a/k/a Linia Burl

No. 2018-OC-1876

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

Second application for reconsideration not considered. Judgment is final. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 2167. No further filings shall be accepted in this matter.