alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 134/2020

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 134 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6324 April 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 134

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6324 April 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions |
| | RESOLUTIONS |
| | Euronest Parliamentary Assembly |
| 2020/C 134/01 | Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on Parliamentary oversight as a tool to strengthen democracy, accountability and effectiveness of state institutions in the Eastern Partner countries | 1 |
| 2020/C 134/02 | Resolution By the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on ‘Facilitating digitalisation to improve efficiency and stimulate economic growth in the EU and Eastern Partnership countries’ | 7 |
| 2020/C 134/03 | Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on ‘Solidarity and approximation in energy sector – towards a progressive regulatory framework’ | 11 |
| 2020/C 134/04 | Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on innovation in education and education reforms in the EU and Eastern partners’ countries: challenges and opportunities’ | 16 |
| 2020/C 134/05 | Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on the future of the Trio Plus Strategy 2030: building a future of Eastern Partnership | 22 |

Contents

page

I   Resolutions, recommendations and opinions

RESOLUTIONS

Euronest Parliamentary Assembly

2020/C 134/01

Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on Parliamentary oversight as a tool to strengthen democracy, accountability and effectiveness of state institutions in the Eastern Partner countries

1

2020/C 134/02

Resolution By the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on ‘Facilitating digitalisation to improve efficiency and stimulate economic growth in the EU and Eastern Partnership countries’

7

2020/C 134/03

Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on ‘Solidarity and approximation in energy sector – towards a progressive regulatory framework’

11

2020/C 134/04

Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on innovation in education and education reforms in the EU and Eastern partners’ countries: challenges and opportunities’

16

2020/C 134/05

Resolution by the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly on the future of the Trio Plus Strategy 2030: building a future of Eastern Partnership

22

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
                                  FORM 10-KSB/A
(Mark One)
   [ X ]   ANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                    SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
           For the fiscal year ended   September 30, 1998

   [   ]   TRANSITION REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
                    SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
           For the transition period from                  to

                         Commission file number 1-14072

                             PEN INTERCONNECT, INC.
        (Exact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

        UTAH                                                87-0430260
 (State or other jurisdiction                (I.R.S. Employer Identification No)
 of incorporation or organization)

                 2351 South 2300 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84119
               (Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)

                                 (801) 973-6090
                           (Issuer's telephone number)

         Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:
                     Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share
                              Common Stock Warrants

           Check  whether the issuer (1) filed all reports  required to be filed
by  Section  13 or 15(d) of the  Exchange  Act during the past 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports),  and
(2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

                                    Yes X    No

           Check if there is no disclosure  of delinquent  filers in response to
Item 405 of  Regulation  S-B contained in this form,  and no disclosure  will be
contained,  to the  best of  registrant's  knowledge,  in  definitive  proxy  or
information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-KSB
or any amendment to this Form 10-KSB. X check

           State issuer's revenues for its most recent fiscal year.  $17,091,432

           As of December 16, 1998,  there were 6,068,481 shares of the Issuer's
common stock,  par value $0.01,  issued and  outstanding.  The aggregate  market
value of the  Issuer's  voting  stock held by  non-affiliated  of the Issuer was
approximately  $8,396,384  computed at the closing  quotation  for the  Issuer's
common stock of $1.563 as of January 11, 1999.

                       DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

           Definitive  Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to
be held in 1999.
<PAGE>


               This  amendment  to the Form  10-KSB/A  to the  Company's  annual
      report for the fiscal  year ended  September  30,  1998 is being  filed to
      include  Schedule  23.1,  the  Consent of Grant  Thornton  LLP,  which was
      inadvertently not included in the original filing.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Adam Griswold, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 346]—

Egan Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Franklin County (Main Jr., J.), rendered May 2, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of sexual abuse in the first degree and criminal sexual act in the second degree (two counts).

Defendant was charged in two separate indictments with 48 counts of various crimes involving the sexual abuse of his stepdaughter — crimes that allegedly began when the child was seven years old and continued for the next nine years. In March 2011, and in full satisfaction of the foregoing indictments and other pending charges, defendant pleaded guilty to one count of sexual abuse in the first degree and two counts of criminal sexual act in the second degree and waived his right to appeal. Pursuant to the terms of the negotiated plea agreement, defendant thereafter was sentenced to consecutive five-year prison terms on each count followed by 10 years of postrelease supervision. Defendant now appeals.

Although defendant’s claim that the indictments were jurisdictionally defective survives both his guilty plea and his unchallenged waiver of the right to appeal *(see People v Martinez,*79 AD3d 1378,1379 [2010], *lv denied*16 NY3d 798 [2011]; *People v Place,*50 AD3d 1313, 1314 [2008], *lv denied*11 NY3d 740 [2008]), we find it to be lacking in merit. “When time is not an essential element of an offense, the indictment . . . may allege the time in approximate terms, as long as it sets forth a time interval which reasonably informs the defendant of the nature of the accusations to enable the preparation of a defense” *(People v Porlier,*55 AD3d 1059, 1060 [2008] [internal quotation marks *1455and citations omitted]; *see People v Roman,*43 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 1009 [2007]; *People v Lanfair,*18 AD3d 1032, 1033 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 790 [2005]). Here, given the tender age of the victim when the abuse began, the frequency with which the abuse occurred and “the familial relationship between the victim and defendant,” the time frames disclosed — expressed as either months and years or seasons— were “sufficiently particularized to permit defendant to prepare a defense” *(People v Porlier,*55 AD3d at 1060; *see People v Roman,*43 AD3d at 1283).

Similarly, “where an indictment count incorporates by reference the statutory provision applicable to the crime intended to be charged, it has been repeatedly held that this is sufficient to apprise the defendant of the charge and, therefore, renders the count jurisdictionally valid” *(People v Brown,*75 AD3d 655, 656 [2010] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; *see People v Place,*50 AD3d at 1314). That standard was met here and, therefore, defendant was provided with fair notice of the charges against him *(see People v Binns,*82 AD3d 1449, 1450 [2011] ; *People v Place,*50 AD3d at 1314). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Peters, J.P, Malone Jr., Kavanagh and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
SMP MARKETING, LLC

,

Appellant,

v.

CHILDS FARMS, INC ., D/B/A CHILDS FARMS, LLC

, AND
AUTO

- OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 14

- 5086

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 10, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Department of Agriculture and Customer Services

. Jay Levenstein, Deputy Commissioner, Florida Department of Agriculture

.

Steven E. Nurenberg , for Appellant.

Dan R. Stengle , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., MARSTILLER and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit
      13.1





Credicorp
      Ltd.


Certification
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18
      U.S.C. Section 1350)





Pursuant
      to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.
      Sections 1350(a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certifies as
      follows:





1.  I
      am the
      Chairman Executive Officer of Credicorp Ltd. (the “Company”).





2.  To
      my
      knowledge:





(A)  The
      Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2006
      accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





Dated:
      June 30, 2008




/s/
                DIONISIO ROMEROName: Dionisio RomeroTitle: Chief Executive
                Officer
Exhibit 31.1**CERTIFICATIONS**     I, Steven G. Murdock, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Meade Instruments Corp.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date:January 17, 2006
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Wheat Health, Genetics, and Quality Research: Pullman, WA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Pullman, Washington WHGQ People







Craig F. Morrisheadline bar Director, Western Wheat Quality Laboratory (WWQL)*
/ARSUserFiles/3966/images/CFM EiC.2012..pngResearch Specialty and Interests:
Wheat grain quality genetics
Novel wheat types (waxy wheats, soft durums)
Wild and ancient wheats*The mission of the WWQL, http://wwql.wsu.edu includes developing new methods of evaluating quality characteristics of doughs and flours, evaluating milling and baking qualities of thousands of wheat samples each year from breeding programs throughout the Western region, and research the biochemical and genetic basis of wheat quality.
Objectives: increase and improve wheat utilization, increase the nutrient density and healthfulness of wheat, protect global genetic resources.   PublicationsNo publications listed for this employee.  ProjectsNo projects listed for this employee.


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Oscar Pena, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.), rendered December 1, 1982, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

There is nothing in the record before us which would support defendant’s contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Defendant’s claims in this regard require the making of an additional record, which should be developed, if defendant be so advised, by way of a collateral, postconviction proceeding pursuant to CPL article 440 *(see, People v Berghout,*106 AD2d 509; *People v Lawrence,*100 AD2d 944; *People v Drummond,*99 AD2d 760). Gibbons, J. P., Brown, Weinstein and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center: Parlier, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        Commodity Protection and Quality Research
                                    Crop Diseases, Pests and Genetics Research
                                    Water Management Research
                                    National Arid Land Plant Genetic Repository
                    Pacific West AreaSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People

Aboutheadline bar Us
               Director
               Credentials
               100th Anniversary of Grapevine Breeding Research Program


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and
Stockholders of OYO Geospace Corporation:

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-80003) of OYO Geospace Corporation of our report
dated November 24, 2003 relating to the financial statements, which appear in
the Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report
dated November 24, 2003 relating to the financial statement schedule, which
appears in this Form 10-K.


                                       /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
December 3, 2003
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Dino Solorzano, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 154]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered May 21, 2009, convicting him of assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree (two counts), and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. *1154The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (O’Dwyer, J.), of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress his statements to law enforcement officials. The defendant’s claim that his statements should have been suppressed based upon the delay in his arraignment is without merit. “An unnecessary delay in an arraignment, without more, does not cause the accused’s right to counsel to attach automatically, and such a delay is only one factor to consider in assessing the voluntariness of a confession” *(People v Williams,*297 AD2d 325, 325 [2002]; *see People v Bryan,*43 AD3d 447 [2007]; *People v Beale,*283 AD2d 653 [2001]). To suppress a statement on this ground, there must be evidence that the delay was for the purpose of depriving the defendant of the right to counsel and obtaining an involuntary confession *(see People v Jackson,*292 AD 2d 466 [2002]), and that this delay was strategically designed so that an accused could be questioned outside the presence of counsel *(see People v Faison,*265 AD2d 422 [1999]).

Here, there is no evidence that the delay was for these purposes. Rather, the evidence demonstrates that the defendant’s statements were freely and voluntarily given after the defendant was apprised of and acknowledged his right to counsel. Thus, considering the totality of the circumstances, the defendant’s statements were voluntarily made *(see People v Bryan,*43 AD3d 447 [2007]; *People v Blackmon,*19 AD3d 611, 612 [2005]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved, and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction *(see People v Starling,*85 NY2d 509, 516 [1995]; *People v Gerrara,*88 AD3d 811, 812 [2011]). Florio, J.P., Lott, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.

Motion by the appellant, inter alia, to strike stated portions of the respondent’s brief on an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered May 21, 2009. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated December 2, 2011, that branch of the motion which was to strike stated portions of the respondent’s brief was held in abeyance and referred to the panel of Justices hearing the appeal for determination upon the argument or submission thereof.

Upon the papers filed in support of the motion, the papers *1155filed in opposition thereto, and upon the argument of the appeal, it is

Ordered that the branch of the motion which was to strike stated portions of the respondent’s brief is denied. Florio, J.E, Lott, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.