alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE of Louisiana v. Joseph HUMBLES

No. 2019-KP-0024

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. Applicant fails to show that he received ineffective assistance of counsel under the standard of *Strickland v. Washington* , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the Legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in state collateral proceedings in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.
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 China Housing & Land Development,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2006 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date 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 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.

Dated:  August 14, 2006                              By: /s/ Lu Pingji
                                                         ------------------
                                                         Lu Pingji
                                                         Chief Executive Officer
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Appellate case name: Orion Real Estate Services Southeast, LLC v. SP Jefferson 

Lakes I, LP

Appellate case number: 01-18-00659-CV

Trial court case number: 1098447

Trial court: County Civil Court at Law No. 1 of Harris County

On September 27, 2018, appellee, SP Jefferson Lakes I, LP, filed a motion to 

dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction, contending that appellant’s May 23, 2018 

motion to set aside default judgment did not extend the time to file a notice of appeal 

because there was no default judgment. Thus, appellee asserts that appellant’s July 23, 

2018 notice of appeal was untimely filed more than 30 days after the order granting 

defendant’s motion for summary judgment was signed on May 2, 2018.

On October 9, 2018, appellant, Orion Real Estate Services Southeast, LLC, filed an 

opposition contending that, although its motion to set aside default judgment did not 

“furnish grounds for vacating a default judgment rather than a summary judgment,” it was 

filed within the 30-day deadline for “motions for new trial” and argued that “[a] new trial 

in this case will neither occasion delay nor prejudice Plaintiff, because the trial date is set 

for later this month.” Thus, appellant argues that its motion to set aside default judgment 

was a motion to modify the judgment because it sought a substantive change, which 

extended its time to file a notice of appeal. See Lane Bank Equip. Co. v. Smith So. Equip., 

Inc., 10 S.W.3d 308, 314 (Tex. 2000).

“Any ‘timely filed postjudgment motion that seeks a substantive change in an 

existing judgment qualifies as a motion to modify under Rule 329b(g) [of the Texas Rules 

of Civil Procedure], thus extending the trial court’s plenary jurisdiction and the appellate 

timetable.’” Kaminetzky v. Newman, No. 01-10-01113-CV, 2011 WL 6938536, at *2 (Tex. 

App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 29, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (quoting Lane Bank Equp. 

Co., 10 S.W.3d at 314) (holding that timely motion to vacate judgment qualified as motion 

for new trial or motion to modify judgment because it sought to vacate judgment and grant 

new trial, thus extending time for notice of appeal). Because appellant’s May 23, 2018 
motion to set aside default judgment was a timely postjudgment motion that sought a 

substantive change in the May 2, 2018 order granting defendant’s motion for summary 

judgment by seeking a new trial, it was a motion to modify the judgment that extended its 

time to file a notice of appeal for 90 days until July 31, 2018, making its July 23, 2018 

notice of appeal timely. See TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(a)(2); Lane Bank Equp. Co., 10 S.W.3d 

at 314. Accordingly, the Court DENIES appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Laura C. Higley

  Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: October 16, 2018
November 14, 2019
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of ChoicePoint Inc. and subsidiaries:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No's.
333-32453 and 333-37498 of ChoicePoint Inc. on Forms S-8 of our report dated
March 6, 2000 on the consolidated financial statements of DBT Online, Inc. and
subsidiaries, appearing as Exhibit 99.1 in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
ChoicePoint Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Fort Lauderdale, Florida
March 26, 2001
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Daniel R.Herndon, certify that:

1.     I havereviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Home FederalBancorp, Inc. of Louisiana (the “Registrant”);

2.     Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.     TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

(a)           Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)          Evaluated theeffectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(c)           Disclosed in thisreport any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theRegistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theRegistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theRegistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)           All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

(b)          Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
| Date: February 14, 2005 | /s/ Daniel R. Herndon                   |   |
|------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|                         | Daniel R. Herndon                       |
|                         | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
#### George Reynold EVANS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. J. SHOAF, Detective; T.A. Weavil, Officer; Sergeant Fry; City of Wilmington, North Carolina, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 03-7375.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 30, 2004.

Decided May 13, 2004.

George Reynold Evans, Appellant pro se.

*890Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

George Reynold Evans appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint as frivolous under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Evans v. Shoaf,*No. CA-03-8 (E.D.N.C. July 29, 2003). 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*
Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 1 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 2 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 3 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 4 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 5 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 6 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 7 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 8 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 9 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 10 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 11 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 12 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 13 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 14 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 15 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 16 of 17

Case 3:17-cv-00079-EMC   Document 257   Filed 06/07/18   Page 17 of 17
1 

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

________________

NO. 09-13-00393-CR

________________

CHARLES CLAYTON BEARD, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 13-17137

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

On August 12, 2013, the trial court sentenced appellant Charles Clayton 

Beard on a conviction for burglary of a habitation. Beard filed a notice of appeal 

on August 22, 2013. The trial court entered a certification of the defendant’s right 

to appeal in which the court certified that this is a plea-bargain case and the 

defendant has no right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The district clerk 

has provided the trial court’s certification to the Court of Appeals. 
2 

On August 27, 2013, we notified the parties that we would dismiss the 

appeal unless the appellant established grounds for continuing the appeal. No 

response has been filed. Because the record does not contain a certification that 

shows the defendant has the right of appeal, we must dismiss the appeal. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 25.2(d). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. 

 APPEAL DISMISSED. 

 

 ________________________________ 

 CHARLES KREGER 

 Justice 

 

Opinion Delivered September 25, 2013 

Do Not Publish 

Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 32.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEYACT OF 2002**     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002and in connection with the Annual Report of onForm 10-K ofChoicePoint Inc. (the “Company”) for the year endedDecember 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),the undersigned, the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of theCompany, certifies that: Based on my knowledge,     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended; and     (2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresult of operations of the Company.     /s/ Derek V. Smith       Derek V. Smith     Chairman and Chief Executive OfficerMarch 13, 2006
32
EX PARTE T.M.H.

1160779 (2151013)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

July 7, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
No. 85-1561.

#### Organized Fishermen of Florida et al. *v.*Hodel, Secretary of the Interior, et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Nathaniel Renard KYLES, DOC #740223, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4608

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 20, 2019

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Rachel Roebuck, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Helene S. Parnes, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

SLEET, SALARIO, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
##### 



EXHIBIT 21.1 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES Anasazi Travel Resources K.K
    
    JapanPegasus Business Intelligence, LP
    
    DelawarePegasus GP, LLC
    
    DelawarePegasus No. 1, LLC
    
    DelawarePegasus Solutions (Netherlands) B.V.
    
    NetherlandsPegasus Solutions Australia Pty Limited
    
    AustraliaPegasus Solutions Companies
    
    DelawarePegasus Solutions GmbH
    
    GermanyPegasus Solutions Korea Ltd.
    
    KoreaPegasus Solutions Limited
    
    UKPegsTour, Limited
    
    UKUniRez, LP
    
    DelawareUtell (Italy) Srl
    
    ItalyUtell (Singapore) Pte Ltd
    
    SingaporeUtell India Private Limited
    
    IndiaUtell International (Thailand) Ltd.
    
    ThailandUtell International (U.K.) Limited
    
    UKUtell International Columbia Ltda
    
    ColumbiaUtell International Do Brasil Turismo Ltda
    
    BrazilUtell International
    
    UKUtell Limited
    
    UKUtell Mexico, S.A. de C.V.
    
    MexicoUtell Pension Trustees Limited
    
    UKUtell Spain, S.L.
    
    SpainAnasazi
Travel Resources GmbH i.L
    
    Germany
EXHIBIT 32

                    CERTIFICATIONS OF CEO AND CFO 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 report of Ridgewood Energy M Fund, LLC (the "Fund") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned 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 the best of
their 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 Fund.

Dated: April 5, 2007                     RIDGEWOOD ENERGY M FUND, LLC

                             By:    /s/  ROBERT E. SWANSON
                                  Name:  Robert E. Swanson
                                 Title:  President and Chief Executive Officer
                                        (Principal Executive Officer)

Dated: April 5, 2007
                             By:    /s/  KATHLEEN P. MCSHERRY
                                  Name:  Kathleen P. McSherry
                                 Title:  Senior Vice President and Chief
                                         Financial Officer
                                         (Principal Financial and Accounting
                                         Officer)


A signed original of this written statement or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to
Ridgewood Energy M Fund, LLC and will be retained by Ridgewood Energy M Fund,
LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request. The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this report or as a
separate disclosure document.
Descuentos y servicios combinados

Visite el sitio web de más abajo para obtener información 

sobre alternativas de precios y descuentos, servicios de 

internet de banda ancha combinados con otros servicios, 

como, por ejemplo, de vídeo, teléfono y servicios inalámbricos, 

y sobre la opción de usar sus propios equipos, como módems 

y enrutadores.

https://www.example.com/discounts

Cargos y condiciones adicionales

Tarifas mensuales del proveedor

Tarifas cobradas una sola vez

Tarifa por fin del servicio antes de lo pactado

Impuestos gubernamentales

Cargo por instalación de equipo $66.67

Cobertura de seguro para equipo 

Buzón de voz

$3.99

$1.00

Tarifa de activación $36.00

Incluidos

n/a

Precio mensual 

Este precio mensual corresponde a una tarifa inicial

Lapso al que se aplica la tarifa inicial

Precio mensual posterior a la tarifa inicial

Duración del contrato

Enlace a los términos del contrato

$75.00

n/a

n/a

n/a

https://www.example.com/terms-of-contract

No

Información de Internet 

de Banda Ancha

Acme Wireless

Plan de datos: 50 Gigabit

Declaración de transparencia para el usuario de servicios de 

internet de banda ancha móvil.

Velocidades de internet proporcionadas con este plan

Velocidad típica de descarga de datos

Cargos por uso adicional de datos

Volumen de datos incluido en este precio 

mensual

Velocidad típica de carga de datos

Latencia típica

Mbps

Mbps

ms

$5/GB

GB

35

5

30

https://www.example.com/data-usage

Política de administración de redes

Atención al cliente

Familiarícese con el lenguaje utilizado en esta etiqueta. Visite el 

sitio web del área de recursos para el consumidor, de la Comisión 

Federal de Comunicaciones (FCC).

Teléfono:

Sitio web:

Identificador Único de Plan: F0005937974123ABC456EMC789

Política de privacidad

(555) 555-5555

https://www.example.com/privacy

https://www.example.com/network-management

https://www.example.com

fcc.gov/consumer

50
OFFICE OF 

INSPECTOR GENERAL InspecƟon Report 

Physical Security in the Farm 

Credit AdministraƟon's Denver 

Field Office 

I‐17‐04 

Inspectors 

Tori Kaufman 

Sonya Cerne 

Issued September 29, 2017 

FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION 
OBJECTIVE

The objective of the inspection 

was to determine the 

effectiveness of controls related 

to physical security in the Denver 

field office. 

BACKGROUND

The Farm Credit Administration 

(FCA or Agency) is an 

independent Federal agency 

responsible for regulating, 

examining, and supervising the 

Farm Credit System and the 

Federal Agricultural Mortgage 

Corporation. The mission of the 

Agency is to ensure a safe, sound, 

and dependable source of credit 

and related services for 

agriculture and rural America. 

FCA employees are critical to 

achieving its mission, and the 

Agency identifies its people as a 

strategic priority. A critical aspect 

of this priority is physical security 

for employees and offices. FCA 

has its headquarters and a field 

office in McLean, Virginia. The 

Agency also has four field offices 

in Bloomington, Minnesota; 

Dallas, Texas; Denver, Colorado; 

and Sacramento, California.

The Farm Credit System Building 

Association (FCSBA) leases the 

office space for FCA field offices.

Physical security controls safeguard FCA employees and 

assets. Physical security is unique in different locations 

and buildings, and the strongest controls cannot eliminate 

security risks. However, strong controls and preparedness 

can improve overall security. For this inspection, we 

reviewed the Denver field office. Our review focused on 

controls in the following areas:

• Access,

• Computers and other equipment,

• Emergency preparedness, and

• Personnel records.

To test physical security controls, we performed 

walkthroughs and surveyed selected employees. We 

developed a checklist to test controls in each area. 

Because each field office is unique, this checklist served as 

a framework to identify areas for improvement. 

To accomplish our objective, we also reviewed laws, 

regulations, policies, and procedures; interviewed Agency 

personnel; and reviewed prior reviews related to our 

objective. This inspection was performed in accordance 

with the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and 

Efficiency’s Quality Standards for Inspection and 

Evaluation.

We found controls were in place and generally effective. 

However, we identified opportunities to further improve 

physical security in the Denver field office. Our report 

included five agreed-upon actions for Agency 

management. 

This report contains sensitive information about FCA and 

potential vulnerabilities that could be used against the 

Agency; therefore, we are not releasing it publicly. 
FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Report Fraud, Waste, Abuse, Mismanagement

Phone: Toll Free (800) 437-7322; (703) 883-4316

Fax: (703) 883-4059

E-mail: fca-ig-hotline@rcn.com

Mail: Farm Credit Administration

Office of Inspector General

1501 Farm Credit Drive

McLean, VA 22102
John OSBORN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2431

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 7, 2019 Rehearing Denied April 25, 2019

John Osborn, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Bilbrey, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.
Bassam MINAWI, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. G. Andrew GRACY, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1403

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 08, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
EX PARTE Carlton Wayne HOLMAN

1170085 (CR-16-0656)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

December 8, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.