alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 13 - 00005 - CR MELVIN GLEN CARTER, APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 251st District Court Randall County, Texas Trial Court No. 22,363 - C, Honorable Ana Estevez, Presiding



### May 21 , 2015 ORDER Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. A fter a jury trial, a ppellant, Melvin Glen Carter , was convicted of the offense of assault on a public servant . On December 13 , 20 12 , appellant was sentenced to incarceration in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, for a period of twelve years. Appellant timely filed a noti ce of appeal of this conviction and was appointed counsel. Appointed counsel filed a brief on appellant’s b ehalf on the merits. However, after review, this Court affirmed appellant’s conviction See Carter v. State , No. 07 - 13 - 00005 - CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEX IS 11265, at *12 (Tex. App. — Amarillo2

Aug. 30, 2013, no pet.). When no petition for discretionary review was filed, mandate was issued on December 2, 20 13 . This Court’s plenary power expired 60 days after judgment. T EX . R. A PP . P. 19.1(a). On May 12, 2015, this Court received correspondence from appellant entitled “First Motion for Extension of Time to File Appellant’s Pro Se Response to Anders Brief.” 1 In an enclosed letter, appellant appears to identify what he is actually requesting. It appears th at appellant is seeking an extension to file a pro se petition for discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. T his Court ’s jurisdiction over this appeal expired 60 days after issuance of our August 30, 2013 judgment. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 19.1(a). Appellant’s filing is more than a year and a half past the expiration of our plenary power over this appeal. As such , no further action may be taken by this Court in this proceeding and the filing is hereby d enied . 2

Per Curiam Do no t publish.

1 As mentioned, appellant’s appointed counsel filed a brief on the merits in this appeal and raised an arguable ground for reversal. Thus, there was never an Anders brief or motion to withdraw for appellant to respond to in this case.

2 While this Court is without jurisdiction over this case , appellant may be able to obtain recourse by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus returnable to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See T EX . C ODE C RIM . P ROC . A NN . art. 11.07 (West Supp. 2014).
Ernst & YOung



        Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



Board of Directors
SunTrust Bank


We have examined management's assertion included in the accompanying report
of Certification Regarding Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria,
that SunTrust Bank (the "Company") complied with the servicing criteria set
forth in Item 1122(d)(2)(i), 1122(d)(4)(i), and 1122(d)(4)(ii) of the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation AB for the residential
mortgage loan servicing platform of SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. as of and for
the year ended December 31, 2007. Refer to management's assertion for the
asset backed transactions covered by this platform. Management is responsible
for the Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about the
Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria based on our
examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as
adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and,
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the
Company's compliance with the applicable servicing criteria and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our
examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset backed
transactions and securities that comprise the platform, testing of less than
all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining
whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those
selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria. Furthermore,
our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing
activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report.
Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have
occurred either prior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected
the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the
period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other
transactions. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for
our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Company's compliance with the servicing criteria.

In our opinion, management's assertion that the Company complied with the
aforementioned servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31,
2007 for the residential mortgage loan servicing platform is fairly stated,
in all material respects.


                                         /s/Ernst & Young
                                         ---------------------------------

March 6, 2008
Rev. 1.8.14 

# Fourth Court of Appeals

NOTIFICATION OF LATE RECORD

Court of Appeals No., if known: 04

- 15

- 00327

- CV

Trial Court Style: ADAM HURON V. ERICK LOPEZ

Trial Court No.: 2012

- CI

- 18827

I am the official responsible for preparing the clerk’s record/reporter’s record [circle one] in the above

referenced appeal. The approximate date of trial was: FEBRUARY 4

- 10, 2015

The record was originally due: JULY 2, 2015

I anticipate the length of the record to be: 1200 PAGES

I am unable to file the record by the date such record is due because [check one]:

the appellant is not entitled to appeal without paying the fee, and the appellant has failed to pay the

fee or make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing such record.

my other duties or activities preclude working on the record and include the following [attach

additional pages if needed]:

Other. Explain [attach additional pages if needed]: I RECEIVED THE DEPOSIT ON 6/9 /15 AND ALSO

I AM ON VACATION JULY 2

- 6, 2015

I anticipate the record will be completed by: WITHIN 30 DAYS FROM JULY 2, 2015

I, as the undersigned court official, certify that a copy of this Notification of Late Record has been served by first class

mail of fax to the parties to the judgment or order being appealed.

Date: 7/1/2015 Signature: /s/Maria E. “ Mary Helen ” Vargas

Printed

Name:

Title: 224 th Official Court Reporter
Stuart DELANCY, petitioner, v. FLORIDA;

Phillip Carnail Baldwin, petitioner, v. Florida; Kristie Ann Callahan, petitioner, v. Florida; David Goodwin, petitioner, v. Florida; Ronald Val Henry, petitioner, v. Florida; Taran Ricky Lenhardt, petitioner, v. Florida; Clyde Eugene McEady, Jr., petitioner, v. Florida; Michelle Antoinette Nezovich, petitioner, v. Florida; and Luis Torres, petitioner, v. Florida.

No. 12-8653.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

FORT WAYNE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 1:12-CR-81

)

JUAN OLIVO )

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

UPON A PLEA OF GUILTY

TO: THE HONORABLE THERESA L. SPRINGMANN, JUDGE, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Upon Defendant’s request to enter a plea of guilty pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure, this matter came on for hearing before U.S. Magistrate Roger B. Cosbey,

on July 2, 2013, with the written consents of the defendant, counsel for the defendant, and counsel

for the United States of America.

The hearing on defendant’s plea of guilty was in full compliance with Rule 11, Federal

Rules of Criminal Procedure, before the Magistrate Judge in open court and on the record.

In consideration of that hearing and the statements made by the defendant under oath on

the record and in the presence of counsel, the remarks of the Assistant United States Attorney and

of counsel for defendant,

I FIND as follows:

(1) that defendant understands the nature of the charge against him to which the plea is

offered;

(2) that the defendant understands his right to trial by jury, to persist in his plea of not

guilty, to the assistance of counsel at trial, to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and
his right against compelled self-incrimination;

(3) that the defendant understands what the maximum possible sentence is, including the

effect of the supervised release term, and defendant understands that the Sentencing Guidelines

apply and that the Court may depart from those guidelines under some circumstances;

(4) that the plea of guilty by the defendant has been knowingly and voluntarily made and

is not the result of force or threats or of promises apart from the plea agreement between the

parties;

(5) that defendant is competent to plead guilty;

(6) that the defendant understands that his answers may later be used against him in a

prosecution for perjury or false statement;

(7) that there is a factual basis for the defendant’s plea; and further,

I RECOMMEND that the Court accept the defendant’s plea of guilty and that the

Defendant be adjudged guilty of the offense charged in Count 2 of the 3-count Indictment, and

have sentence imposed. A Presentence Report has been ordered. Should this Report and

Recommendation be accepted and the Defendant adjudged guilty, sentencing will be scheduled

before Judge Theresa L. Springmann by separate order and notice. Objections to the Findings

and Recommendation are waived unless filed and served within fourteen (14) days. 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(B).

DATED this 2nd day of July, 2013.

/s/ Roger B. Cosbey 

Roger B. Cosbey

United States Magistrate Judge

2
EXHIBIT 32.2

                      CERTIFICATION OF THE 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Niagara
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Anthony J. Verkruyse, as the Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
SS. 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/ Anthony J. Verkruyse
-------------------------
Anthony J. Verkruyse
Vice President, Treasurer & Chief Financial Officer
November 14, 2003




This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
ss.18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Alonso VALENCIA, petitioner, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.

No. 12-9786.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

SOUTH BEND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) CAUSE NO. 3:14-CR-53 RM 

)

ALFRED FRANK DILLARD )

ORDER

No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s findings and

recommendations upon a plea of guilty entered on September 17, 2014.

Accordingly, the court ADOPTS those findings and recommendations [docket #

23], ACCEPTS defendant Alfred Dillard’s plea of guilty, and FINDS the defendant

guilty of Count 1 of the Indictment, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). 

SO ORDERED.

ENTERED: October 8, 2014 

 /s/ Robert L. Miller, Jr. 

Judge, United States District Court

Northern District of Indiana
James L. WAVER, petitioner, v. Terry A. TIBBALS, Warden

No. 12-9624

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 12, 2013.

Petition for rehearing denied.
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 on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2009 of Boeing Capital Corporation (the Company) as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Walter E. Skowronski, President of the Company, certify, that:



| | (1) |  | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|               |  |  |  |                               
|-------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------
|April 22, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/ WALTER E. SKOWRONSKI      
|               |  |  |  | Walter E. Skowronski President



23
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF ACR GROUP, INC. PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of ACR Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for theperiod ending November 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Anthony R. Maresca, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to my knowledge that: 

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 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 result of operations of the Company. 

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, has been provided to ACR Group, Inc. and will be retained by ACR Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed June 24, 

2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-20-00844-CR

NO. 14-20-00845-CR

NO. 14-20-00846-CR

NO. 14-20-00847-CR

NO. 14-20-00848-CR

____________

RICARDO SALDANA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 351st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 1623964, 1623965, 1623966, 1623967, and 1623968

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Ricardo Saldana has signed and filed a written request to 

withdraw his notice of appeal in each of these cases. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. 

Because this court has not delivered an opinion, we grant appellant’s request.
2

We dismiss the appeal in each case and direct the clerk of the court to issue 

the mandate of the court immediately. See Tex. R. App. P. 2.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Zimmerer and Hassan. 

Do Not Publish – Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1385 

To include Nelson County, Virginia, in the Appalachian region for purposes 

of the programs of the Appalachian Regional Commission. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2005 

Mr. GOODE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To include Nelson County, Virginia, in the Appalachian region for purposes of the programs of the Appalachian 

Regional Commission. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INCLUSION OF NELSON COUNTY AND FRANK4 LIN COUNTY, VIRGINIA, IN THE APPA5 LACHIAN REGION. 

6 Section 14102(a)(1)(L) of title 40, United States 

7 Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘Nelson,’’ after ‘‘Mont8 gomery,’’. 

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         231,194
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 320,851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          231,194
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      89,657
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   320,851
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,110,282
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,082,753
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                27,529
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.16
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 26, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 20556]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10430]



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


United States International Trade Commission

[USITC SE-95-013]

TIME AND DATE: May 19, 1995 at 10:00 a.m.
PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street S.W., Washington, DC 20436.
STATUS:

    1. Agenda for future meeting.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Inv. No. 731-TA-731 (Preliminary) (Bicycles from the People's 
Republic of China)--briefing and vote.
    5. Outstanding action jackets: None.

    In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, 
not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the 
agenda of the following meeting.
    By order of the Commission:
    Issued: April 24, 1995.
Donna R. Koehnke,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-10430 Filed 4-24-95; 3:46 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
Clifford DARDEN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10392.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 27292]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12541]



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



FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Towne Bancorp, Inc., et al.; Formations of; Acquisitions by; and 
Mergers of Bank Holding Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied for the Board's 
approval under section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 
1842) and Sec.  225.14 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.14) to 
become a bank holding company or to acquire a bank or bank holding 
company. The factors that are considered in acting on the applications 
are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    Each application is available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Once the application has been accepted 
for processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing to the Reserve Bank or to the offices of the Board of 
Governors. Any comment on an application that requests a hearing must 
include a statement of why a written presentation would not suffice in 
lieu of a hearing, identifying specifically any questions of fact that 
are in dispute and summarizing the evidence that would be presented at 
a hearing.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received not later than June 16, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (John J. Wixted, Jr., Vice 
President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101:
    1. Towne Bancorp, Inc., Perrysburg, Ohio; to become a bank holding 
company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Towne Bank, 
Perrysburg, Ohio.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (James A. Bluemle, Vice 
President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690:
    1. Foursquare Cornerstone, Inc., Brookfield, Wisconsin; to become a 
bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of 
Cornerstone Bank, Brookfield, Wisconsin, a de novo bank.
    C. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (James M. Lyon, Vice 
President) 250 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480:
    1. Security Northwest Bancorporation, Inc., Bloomington, Minnesota; 
to merge with The Highland Bancorporation, Inc., Bloomington, 
Minnesota, and thereby indirectly acquire The Highland Bank, St. Paul, 
Minnesota.
    D. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (John E. Yorke, Senior Vice 
President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198:
    1. Whitcorp Financial Company, Leoti, Kansas; to merge with Western 
Bancorp, Inc., Garden City, Kansas, and thereby indirectly acquire 
Western State Bank, Garden City, Kansas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 17, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-12541 Filed 5-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F