alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Anthony Craig Rouswell, * From the 50th District Court

of Baylor County,

Trial Court No. 5663.

Vs. No. 11-24-00045-CR * July 25, 2024

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Williams, J.

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no 

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
Michael Scott STURGEON, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 4D18-3406

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 10, 2019]

Gregory C. Rosenfeld of Law Offices of Greg Rosenfeld, P.A., West Palm Beach, Andrew B. Greenlee of Andrew B. Greenlee, P.A., Sanford, and Joshua LeRoy of LeRoy Law, P.A., West Palm Beach, for petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael Kaiman, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for respondent.

Per Curiam.

*Petition Denied.*

May and Forst, JJ., concur.

Kuntz, J., concurring with opinion.

Kuntz, J., concurring.

I fully join the Court's denial of Michael Sturgeon's petition for writ of certiorari to quash the circuit court's order denying his motion to end his probation. Sturgeon pleaded guilty to eleven counts of possession of child pornography. The court sentenced Sturgeon to four years in prison *631followed by five years of sex offender probation. Under the plea agreement, his sentence included a "no early termination" of probation clause.

After four years of probation, Sturgeon moved to end his probation. The circuit court denied the motion. But, it noted that it would have granted the motion if not for the State's objection because of the no early termination provision.

Sturgeon argues the no early termination provision is unenforceable because it violates the controlling statute, violates the separation of powers, contravenes public policy, and is unenforceable and severable under contract law.

Sturgeon is correct that appellate courts have held that where a circuit court imposes special conditions of probation, the imposition of a no early termination provision violates section 948.05, Florida Statutes. *See, e.g.* , *Arriaga v. State* , 666 So.2d 949, 950 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) ; *Jones v. State* , 666 So.2d 191, 192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) ; *Baker v. State* , 619 So.2d 411, 412 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). But, even if those cases were correctly decided,1 they are distinguishable because this case involves a negotiated plea agreement.

Here, Sturgeon and the State entered into a valid and binding plea agreement that included a no early termination provision. Both the State and Sturgeon received benefits to the detriment of the other from the plea agreement. To ignore the no early termination provision and allow Sturgeon to terminate probation would allow him to enjoy the benefits of the plea bargain but avoid the burden.

The circuit court correctly declined to relieve Sturgeon from the burden of the valid agreement. I fully join the Court's affirmance of the circuit court's order.

1

*But see**Arriaga* , 666 So.2d at 950 (Farmer, J., dissenting) ("If ... *Baker* stands for the proposition that the sentencing judge is barred from expressing an intention that the offender serve the full period of probation imposed without premature remission, I should have difficulty in accepting it. It certainly seems to me that, in deciding to forego commitment to prison, the sentencing judge may intend that the full period of probation is the price for the avoidance of prison.").
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION

(Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350)



The undersigned hereby certifies
that, to his knowledge, (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed by First Citizens Bancorporation, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the information contained in that report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition at September 30, 2004, September 30, 2003 and December 31, 2003, and the results of
operations of the Company for the quarters ended September 30, 2004 and September 30, 2003 .



|                       |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 9, 2004 |  | /s/ Jim B. Apple       
|                       |  | Jim B. Apple           
|                       |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                       | 
|Date: November 9, 2004 |  | /s/ Craig L. Nix       
|                       |  | Craig L. Nix           
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer
Joseph J. DEMTY, Appellant, v. PENTIUM CONSTRUCTION, INC., Appellee.

No. 3D18-2504

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed July 3, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

COLLEEN DENISE WALKER,

Plaintiff,

v.

CA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT 

DEPT.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00071-JCS 

9th Cir. Case No. 17-16486

ORDER REVOKING IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS STATUS FOR PURPOSE OF 

APPEAL

Re: Dkt. Nos. 16, 17

This Court previously dismissed Plaintiff Colleen Denise Walker’s complaint pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), and Walker appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit. On August 1, 2017, the Ninth Circuit referred to this Court the issue of whether Walker’s 

in forma pauperis status should be revoked based on a frivolous or bad faith appeal. Referral 

Notice (dkt. 17). On August 2, 2017, this Court issued an order to show cause why that status 

should not be revoked, ordering Walker to file a response no later than August 16, 2017. Order to 

Show Case (dkt. 16). That deadline has passed with no response filed.

The Court is aware of no non-frivolous basis for appeal of its order dismissing the case. 

Walker’s in forma pauperis status is therefore REVOKED for the purpose of her appeal. See 28 

U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Hooker v. Am. Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1091–92 (9th Cir. 2002). The Clerk 

is instructed to send a copy of this order to the Clerk of Court of the Ninth Circuit.

Walker is advised that as a result of this determination, she will be required to pay the 

filing fee set by applicable appellate rules if she wishes to proceed with her appeal. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 18, 2017 ______________________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

Chief Magistrate Judge
May 17, 2012

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

FARDAD ADULI, Appellant

NO. 14-10-01039-CV V.

VALERIE ADULI, Appellee

____________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Valerie Aduli, 

signed August 17, 2010, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the 

record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below 

AFFIRMED.

We order appellant, Fardad Aduli, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. We 

further order this decision certified below for observance.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 81 (Thursday, April 27, 1995)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 20751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10314]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Gas Pipeline Monitoring for Third-Party Damage

    Notice is hereby given that, on February 21, 1995, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Southwest Research 
Institute (``SwRI'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
(1) the identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of 
the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) 
of the Act, the identities of the parties are: Tokyo Gas Company, LTD., 
Yokohama JAPAN; Osaka Gas Company, Ltd., Osaka, JAPAN; and Toho Gas 
Company, Ltd., Nagoya JAPAN. The general areas of planned activities 
are to determine what technologies are available for monitoring of 
damage to gas pipelines by conducting a literature survey concerning 
detection of third-party damage to pipelines, sensing systems being 
utilized and signal processing technologies available in order to 
advise the participants of such a system's detection capabilities to 
display the location of damage, to announce the detection of damage, 
and to indicate the grade or degree of damage which has occurred; by 
exploring related detected technologies and by evaluating the 
information gathered in order to recommend one or more technical 
approaches for further research and system development.
    Membership in the program is closed and SwRI intends to file 
additional written notification if there are any changes in planned 
activities.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-10314 Filed 4-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, petitioner, v. ENTERGY CORPORATION and Affiliated Subsidiaries.

No. 12-277.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
TYRONE JULIUS, Plaintiff,

v. 

### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Civil Action No. SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendant. 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION 

# FILED NOV 2 7 2009 NANCYMAYER WHITTINGTON CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT' 

# (j9**~250**

This matter comes before the court on plaintiffs application to proceed informapauperis and pro se civil complaint. The court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint. Rule 8(a) ofthe Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure requires that a complaint contain a short and plain statement ofthe grounds upon which the court'sjurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement ofthe claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand forjudgment for the reliefthe pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The purpose ofthe minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants ofthe claim being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense and to determine whetherthe doctrine ofres judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiffs complaint sets forth no facts at all, and utterly fails to complywith the minimal requirements ofRule 8(a). Neither the court nor the defendant can discern the nature or basis of plaintiffs claim, and the basis ofthe court'sjurisdiction is unclear. As drafted, the complaint fails to complywith Rule 8(a) , and, accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed. An Order consistent with this Memorandum Opinion will be issued on this same date.

# rk+~.~ Date: \ \ 

# ItO

# Id\ United States District Judge
Anthony PETERSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10064.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
LaSalle
      Bank N.A.135
      South LaSalle StreetSuite
      1625Chicago,
      IL 60603Global
      Securities and Trust Services


ANNUAL
COMPLIANCE STATEMENT
 
 VIA:
EMAIL
 
 J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.
 270 Park
Avenue, 10th Floor
 New York,
New York 10017
  Re:
              J.P. Morgan
      Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-LDP11Commercial
      Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-LDP11 (the
    “Trust”)
 
 
 I,
Barbara L. Marik, on behalf of LaSalle Bank National Association, as trustee and
paying agent (the "Certifying Servicer"), certify to J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. and its officers, directors and affiliates,
and with the knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification,
that:
 
 1.    I
have reviewed the Certifying Servicer's activities during the preceding calendar
year or portion thereof and the Certifying Servicer's performance under the
Pooling and Servicing Agreement; and
 
 2.    To
the best of my knowledge, based on my review, the Certifying Servicer has
fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in
all material respects throughout such year or portion thereof.
 
 
 Date:
February 27, 2008
 
 LaSalle
Bank National Association, as Trustee and Paying Agent
 
 
 /s/
Barbara L. Marik
 Barbara
L. Marik
 Senior
Vice President
Anthony HORSLEY, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-3207

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed July 2, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

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 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ending November 30, 2008 of River Exploration, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the
"Company"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), I, Andrew Aird, Chairman, President and Chief
Financial 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:

     1.   The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
          and

     2.   The information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in
          all material respects, the financial condition and results of
          operation of the Company.



 /s/ ANDREW AIRD
 ____________________________________________
     Andrew Aird
     President, Secretary Treasurer,
     Principal Executive Officer,
     Principal Financial Officer and Director


Date: February 27, 2009
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in Registration Statements of Discover Bank and Discover Card Execution Note Trust (Registration Numbers 333-141703, 333-141703-01, 333-141703-02, 333-167413, 333-167413-01 and 333-167413-02) on Form S-3 of our Reports of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm dated February 19, 2013 relating to Management’s Assertions on Compliance with Regulation AB Criteria, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Discover Card Execution Note Trust for the year endedNovember 30, 2012, and to the reference to us under the heading “Experts” in the Prospectus, which is part of these Registration Statements. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Chicago, Illinois 

February 19, 2013
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HCA HEALTHCARE, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.17-cv-00134-VKD 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE

On May 23, 2019, plaintiff-relator Zuri Lazard filed a request for voluntary dismissal. 

Dkt. No. 41. The United States and the State of California filed their written consents to dismissal 

pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(1). Dkt. Nos. 43, 44. 

Accordingly, the Court hereby DISMISSES this action without prejudice. The Clerk of the 

Court shall close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 18, 2019

VIRGINIA K. DEMARCHI

United States Magistrate Judge
IN THE

TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

§

§

EX PARTE JOHNNY GREEN JR. § NO.WR-62,574-03

§

•§. TRIAL COURT N0.1199474-A

§ 372nd DISTRICT COURT, TARRANT COUNTY

§ RECEIVED IN'

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

PETITIONERS MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FEB 11 2015 FOR PETITION OF DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

Abel Acosta, Clerk TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:

Comes now Johnny Green Jr. petitioner pro-se, and would request an

FILED IN extension of time in order to file his Petition^o^^^fj^i^^^s

Review and would show in support thereof the following: .. nn|c

1. Petitioner was granted the right to file an out-of-tMnfte, Petition

for Discretionary Review in a Mandate issued by this court on

January 28, 2015. In No.WR-62,574-03. Petitioner has until

Febuary 28, 2015 to file his PDR.

2. Petitioner requests an extension of sixty (60) days in which to

file his PDR, which would require the filing of his Petition to

be April 28, 2015. Pursuant to; Tex -R. App.Proc .R. 10 :. 5(b) &.,68..2

3. The petitioner is limited to fifteen hours per week in the unit

law library to research and prepare his petition. The petitioner

is not an attorney and must familiarize himself with the rules

and the neccessary content of his petition.

4. The Petitioner has not previously requested an extension of time

in regards to his PDR or any other Item. This is his first request.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore premise having been considered, the petitioner humbly

requests and pray's that this Honorable Court grant an Extension

of time to file his PDR, in the amount of sixty (60) days and

adjust his filing deadline to April.28,2015. Further, the petitioner

would ask this court to grant any other relief in accordance with

this motion to which petitioner is entitled.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

JOHNNY GREEN JR. #1738876

MARK W. STILES UNIT

3060 F.M. 3514

BEAUMONT,TX.77705

DECLARATION

I declare under the penalty of perjury, pursuant to the laws

of the State of Texas, that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on this the 4th day of Febuary, 2015.

DULY SWORN

JOHNNY GREEN JR. #1738876

Petitioner pro-se
EX PARTE Ronnie Odell PARKER

CR-17-0354

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Transferred to Clarke Cir. Ct.
Richard VALENCIA, petitioner, v. W.J. SULLIVAN, Acting Warden.

No. 12-9429.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
July 14 , 2016



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

IN THE MATTER OF THE MARRIAGE OF STEVEN W . ARD AND MARSHA ARD

- PHILLIPS

NO. 14

- 14

- 00808

- CV

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the final divorce decree signed Augus t 29, 2014, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant Marsha Ard

- Phillips to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 719 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 719

  Expressing support for the designation of July 2022 as ``Disability 
                             Pride Month''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 26, 2022

  Ms. Klobuchar (for herself and Mr. Portman) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, 
                          Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing support for the designation of July 2022 as ``Disability 
                             Pride Month''.

Whereas, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 61,000,000 
        adults in the United States have disabilities;
Whereas the United States Census Bureau reports that more than 3,000,000 
        children in the United States have disabilities;
Whereas the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) 
        was signed into law on July 26, 1990;
Whereas individuals with a disability remain at an increased risk of 
        experiencing discrimination, isolation, and inequities;
Whereas individuals with disabilities are vital and make meaningful 
        contributions to the arts, science, health care, technology, sports, 
        education, law, and many more sectors; and
Whereas ``Disability Pride Month'' is celebrated in July by people across the 
        United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) expresses support for the designation of July 2022 as 
        ``Disability Pride Month''; and
            (2) calls on the people of the United States, interest 
        groups, and affected people to--
                    (A) observe ``Disability Pride Month'' with 
                appropriate celebrations and activities; and
                    (B) take an active role in preventing the exclusion 
                of, and discrimination against, individuals with 
                disabilities.
                                 <all>
```
Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 1 of 9 PageID 283
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 2 of 9 PageID 284
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 3 of 9 PageID 285
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 4 of 9 PageID 286
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 5 of 9 PageID 287
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 6 of 9 PageID 288
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 7 of 9 PageID 289
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 8 of 9 PageID 290
 

 Case 3:05-cv-02404-P Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 9 of 9 PageID 291
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID WALKER, ET AL.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CORDIS CORPORATION, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00735-HSG 

REFERRAL FOR PURPOSE OF 

DETERMINING RELATIONSHIP

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-12(c), the above-entitled case is hereby REFERRED, to 

the Honorable Edward M. Chen for consideration of whether the case is related to Dunson v. 

Cordis Corporation, Case No. 16-cv-03076-EMC.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:

______________________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

2/22/2017

Case 3:17-cv-00735-EMC Document 12 Filed 02/22/17 Page 1 of 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 annual report of GLG Life Tech Corporation (the “Company”)
on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brian Meadows,
Chief Financial 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:





(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 this Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





/s/ Brian
Meadows


Brian
Meadows


Chief
Financial Officer