alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[No. 37913-5-I.

Division One.

August 25, 1997.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Shawn Sylvester Clark, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 95-1-02685-7, Deborah D. Fleck, J., entered December 18, 1995. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Agid, J., concurred in by Coleman and Grosse, JJ.
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5, the court has determined t hat

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



### ____________________

No. 01-10091 Summary Calendar



### ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIE LEON WASHINGTON,

Defendant-Appellant.



### ____________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas

(5:94-CR-31-2-C)



### ____________________________________________________________ June 4, 2001

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Willie Leon Washington appeals the district court’s revocation

of his supervised release. Washington was represented by appointed

counsel (Federal Public Defender).

First, Washington maintains the court: should have required

the Government to present independent evidence agai nst him; and

should have provided reasons for its judgment. Washington waived

these rights by pleading true to the charges in the revocation

motion. S ee Morrissey v. Brewer

, 408 U.S. 471, 489 (1972); United2

States v. Ayers

, 946 F.2d 1127, 1129-30 (5th Cir. 1991); United

States v. Holland , 850 F.2d 1048, 1050-51 (5th Cir. 1988).

Second, Washington also contends, for the first time on

appeal, that the court should have ascertained on the record that

this plea was knowing and voluntary. He asserts that, even though

a revocation hearing is involved, such court-action is required

under Boykin v. Alabama , 395 U.S. 238 (1969). Because Washington

did not object to the court’s failure to do so, review is only for

plain error. E .g., United States v. Calverley

, 37 F.3d 160, 162-64

(5th Cir. 1994)(en banc), cert. denied

, 513 U.S. 1196 (1995).

Washington does not even satisfy the first step for plain error

review; he has failed to show “clear” or “obvious” error arising

out of not being provided Boykin protections at the hearing.

AFFIRMED
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jans Parris, Appellant.

— Appeals by defendant from three judgments of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Krausman, J.), each rendered July 14, 1983, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts) and robbery in the second degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon his pleas of guilty, and imposing sentences.

Judgments affirmed.

On the instant appeals, defendant argues that the failure of complainant to make an in-court identification, notwithstanding his prior lineup identification, creates a reasonable doubt as to his guilt. During the trial, an officer testified that he was present when complainant made a lineup identification. Such testimony is permissible (CPL 60.25; *People v Lagana,*36 NY2d 71, 74, *cert denied*424 US 942). Defendant further argues that his *age,*17, coupled with his intelligence and family background, was sufficient to accord him youthful offender treatment. The granting of youthful offender treatment lies within the discretion of the court *(People v Williams,*78 AD2d 642). Finally, it is urged that the allocutions during defendant’s guilty pleas were inadequate. It should also be noted that the issue urged was not raised in the court of first instance by way of a motion to withdraw the pleas or to vacate the judgments. Therefore, it has not been preserved for review *(see, People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636). In any event, a complete allocution recitation is not a prerequisite for a plea, if the record demonstrates that it was knowingly and voluntarily entered, with competent assistance of counsel *(see, People v Harris,*61 NY2d 9, 16-17). Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                         0000714634
<NAME>                        BIOMUNE SYSTEMS, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                      OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                1,123,000
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                           553,716
<ALLOWANCES>                             (5,448)
<INVENTORY>                             205,785
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      1,925,589
<PP&E>                                  217,835
<DEPRECIATION>                         (150,765)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        4,659,871
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   836,580
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                           1,255,044
<COMMON>                                    515
<OTHER-SE>                            2,567,732
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          4,659,871
<SALES>                                 143,448
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        143,448
<CGS>                                    50,207
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            50,207
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        206,440
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               0
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     198,289
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         (46,200)
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                            152,089
<EPS-BASIC>                              0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.04


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 13.02**

 

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

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Genetic Technologies Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas Godfrey Howitt, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

(i)             the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Thomas G. Howitt |                    |
|----------------------|-------------------------|
| Name:                | Thomas G. Howitt        |   |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

 

December 17th, 2010

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          6,517,002
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     200,501
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                6,970,681
<PP&E>                                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  8,604,311
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           2,207,462
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                           105
<COMMON>                                        1,019,459
<OTHER-SE>                                        316,284
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    8,604,311
<SALES>                                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        0
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   1,894,513
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 13,879
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,802,497)
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,802,497)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   416,249
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,386,248)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.06)
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 201 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 201

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to stabilize the amount 
                    of the Medicare part B premium.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2005

Mr. Scott of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
    to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the 
Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined 
 by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
        fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to stabilize the amount 
                    of the Medicare part B premium.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Keep the Promise of Medicare Act of 
2005''.

SEC. 2. STABILIZATION OF MEDICARE PART B PREMIUM.

    Section 1839(a)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
1395r(a)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
sentence: ``Notwithstanding the preceding sentences, the monthly 
premium rate determined under this paragraph for each month in 2006 may 
not exceed an amount equal to the monthly premium rate determined under 
this paragraph for each month in 2005 adjusted by the percentage change 
in the average Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical 
Workers (CPI-W) for the third quarter of 2004 to the third quarter of 
2005.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-6379

JERRY PAUL COOPER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA04-2704)

Submitted: June 23, 2005 Decided: June 30, 2005

Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Paul Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Ann Norman Bosse, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Paul Cooper, a state prisoner, seeks to appeal the

district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254

(2000) motion. This order is not appealable unless a circuit

justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1); see Reid v. Angelone, 369 F.3d 363, 368-69, 374 n.7

(4th Cir. 2004). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

the district court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is

debatable and that any dispositive procedural findings by the

district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v.

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S.

473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude

that Cooper has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
United States District Court

Northern District of Indiana

Hammond Division

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 

v. Case No. 2:16-CR-22 JVB

DAVID VICTOR

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate

Judge filed on October 18, 2016, on a plea of guilty by Defendant David Victor (DE 75). No

objections have been filed to Magistrate Judge Martin’s findings and recommendations. 

Accordingly, the Court now ADOPTS those findings and recommendations, ACCEPTS the

guilty plea of Defendant David Victor, and FINDS the Defendant guilty of the offense charged

in Count 3 of the indictment. 

SO ORDERED on November 7, 2016.

s/ Joseph S. Van Bokkelen 

Joseph S. Van Bokkelen

United States District Judge
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2257 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to expand coverage of 

bone mass measurements under part B of the Medicare Program to 

all individuals at clinical risk for osteoporosis. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 11, 2005 

Mr. BURGESS (for himself, Ms. BERKLEY, and Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and 

Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to expand 

coverage of bone mass measurements under part B of 

the Medicare Program to all individuals at clinical risk 

for osteoporosis. 

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 ‘‘Medicare Osteoporosis 

5 Measurement Act of 2005’’. 
2 

•HR 2257 IH 

1 SEC. 2. COVERAGE OF BONE MASS MEASUREMENTS FOR 

2 ALL INDIVIDUALS AT CLINICAL RISK FOR 

3 OSTEOPOROSIS. 

4 (a) COVERAGE.—Section 1861(rr)(2)(A) of the Social 

5 Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(rr)(2)(A)) is amended to 

6 read as follows: 

7 ‘‘(A) an individual, including an estrogen8 deficient woman, at clinical risk for 

9 osteoporosis;’’. 

10 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

11 subsection (a) applies with respect to items and services 

12 furnished on or after October 1, 2005. 

Æ
Wayne WILLIS, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 12-9723.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, denied.
EXHIBIT
        23
  CONSENT
        OF SELIGSON & GIANNATTASIO, LLP
 
 We
        consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated September 30,
        2006
        with respect to the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto of
        TechnoConcepts, Inc. included in its Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the
        fiscal
        year ended September 30, 2006 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
        into the Company's Registration Statement on Form SB-2(SEC File No.
        333-124609).
 
   Seligson
        & Giannattasio, LLP
 White
        Plains, NY
 January
        16, 2007
Exhibit 99.1

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

This Certification is intended to accompany the Quarterly Report of First
Colonial Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September
30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),
and is given solely for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. To the best of their knowledge, the undersigned, in their respective
capacities as set forth below, hereby certify that:

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

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


/s/ SCOTT V. FAINOR           Chief Executive Officer    Date: November 13, 2002


/s/ REID L. HEEREN            Chief Financial Officer    Date: November 13, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000712964
<NAME> SEALRIGHT CO., INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               8
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,206
<ALLOWANCES>                                       610
<INVENTORY>                                     43,844
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                75,896
<PP&E>                                         249,804
<DEPRECIATION>                                 108,364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 230,905
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,332
<BONDS>                                         81,350
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,107
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,382
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   230,905
<SALES>                                        209,214
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               209,214
<CGS>                                          173,790
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  173,790
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                25,658
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   180
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,050
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,272
<INCOME-TAX>                                       814
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,458
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,458
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.13
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AND RULE 13a-14(b) OR RULE 15d-14(b)

OF THE U.S. SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



In connection with the annual report of Altus Explorations, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 15, 2008 (the "Report"), each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates 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: May 20, 2008

/s/ David Whyte

David Whyte

Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 23

- 00292

- CR

Cesar Sanchez a/k/a Cesar Sanchez Jr.
v. The State of Texas

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 2 of Bexar County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 697638

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, ha ving considered this cause on
appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed

. The Court
orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
February 22, 2024
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     
</LEGEND>
<CIK>         0000714256
<NAME>        MB Software Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US DOLLARS
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         885,297
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,249,726
<ALLOWANCES>                                   632,912
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,449,932
<PP&E>                                         481,187
<DEPRECIATION>                                 52,950
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 5,664,774
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          4,090,208
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       68,700
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   5,664,774
<SALES>                                        2,256,075
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2,256,075
<CGS>                                          1,324,858
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,453,394
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             138,695
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (253,755)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (253,755)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (59,486)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (143,687)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        


</TABLE>