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

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00276-CR

CHADWICK JERAMINE PARKS APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 4 OF DENTON COUNTY

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Chadwick Jeramine Parks attempts to appeal his conviction for possession 

of less than two ounces of marihuana. We have no jurisdiction to entertain an 

appeal, however, because Mr. Parks has filed no timely written notice of appeal 

in compliance with the rules. Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(b), in 

pertinent part, provides that, “In a criminal case, appeal is perfected by timely 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

filing a sufficient notice of appeal.” Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(b). Rule 26.2(a) 

provides that notice is timely if filed “(1) within 30 days after the day sentence is 

imposed or suspended in open court, or after the day the trial court enters an 

appealable order; or (2) within 90 days after the day sentenced is imposed or 

suspended in open court if the defendant timely files a motion for new trial.” Tex. 

R. App. 26.2(a).

The record shows that Mr. Parks did not file a motion for new trial or a 

written notice of appeal but that he gave a verbal notice of appeal in the trial 

court. Unfortunately, however, by doing so, he failed to invoke our jurisdiction to 

hear his appeal. See Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 

1998); Olivo v. State, 918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). Where we 

are without jurisdiction, we are without power to act. See Olivo, 918 S.W.2d at 

523; Ex parte Caldwell, 383 S.W.2d 587, 589 (Tex. Crim. App. 1964) (op. on 

reh’g) (“Jurisdiction of a court must be legally invoked, and when not legally 

invoked, the power of the court to act is as absent as if it did not exist.”).

We sent notice to Mr. Parks expressing our concern that we lacked 

jurisdiction over this appeal and advising him that the appeal would be dismissed 

unless he or any party timely sent us a reply stating the grounds for continuing 

the appeal. Mr. Parks timely responded, but his response does not provide any 

grounds for continuing this appeal.

Consequently, we may take no action other than to dismiss it. See Slaton, 

981 S.W.2d at 210 (reasoning that if an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of 
3

appeals has no jurisdiction to address the merits and can take no action other 

than to dismiss it). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

See Tex. R. App. 26.2(a); 43.2(f); Olivo, 918 S.W.3d at 522–23; Martinez v. 

State, No. 02–13–00045–CR, 2013 WL 978808, at *1 (Tex. App––Fort Worth 

Mar. 14, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: October 24, 2013
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
 Crop Diseases, Pests and Genetics Research: Parlier, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center
                                    Commodity Protection and Quality Research
                                    Water Management Research
                                    National Arid Land Plant Genetic RepositorySearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Parlier, California San Joaquin Valley Agricultural Sciences Center Crop Diseases, Pests and Genetics Research People & Locations





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

People and Locations at Parlier, California   [Expand All] [Collapse All]
  (Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
## ELECTRONIC RECORD 

# %0O-tS SOl-15
COA # 02-14-00176-CR Quinn Ford, Jr. v. The State of 

### STYLE: Texas COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM 

### OFFENSE: 22.02 COUNTY: Tarrant TRIAL COURT: 297th District Court DATE: 05/28/15 Publish: NO TCCASE#: 1267457D



### IN THE COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS 

# SO/»/ff STYLE: Quinn Ford, Jr. v. The State ofTexas 

# APPSLLAA/r's Petition FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS: 

# DATE: OH/u/jpr 

# M JUDGE: 

### 1A. CCA#: 

### CCADisposition: DATE: JUDGE: 

### SIGNED: PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS: JUDGE: PC:_ DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 169 (Friday, September 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 49532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17107]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[FR ID 42210]


Open Meeting; Correction

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) published a 
document in the Federal Register of August 6, 2021, announcing a 
meeting on Thursday, August 5, 2021. The agenda has since changed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Riordan, the Office of Media 
Relations, (202) 418-0500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of August 6, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-16868, 
on page 43237, delete the following agenda items in the chart:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5......................  MEDIA...............  Title: Revisions to
                                                Political Programming
                                                and Record-Keeping Rules
                                                (MB Docket No. 21-293).
                                               Summary: The Commission
                                                will consider a Notice
                                                of Proposed Rulemaking
                                                to update outmoded
                                                political programming
                                                rules.
6......................  WIRELESS              Title: Review of the
                          TELECOMMUNICATIONS.   Commission's Part 95
                                                Personal Radio Services
                                                Rules (WT Docket No. 10-
                                                119).
                                               Summary: The Commission
                                                will consider a
                                                Memorandum Opinion and
                                                Order on Reconsideration
                                                that would grant three
                                                petitions for
                                                reconsideration of the
                                                Commission's May 2017
                                                Part 95 Personal Radio
                                                Services Rules Report
                                                and Order.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated: August 4, 2021.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-17107 Filed 9-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
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
 Range Sheep Production Efficiency Research: Dubois, ID
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Dubois, Idaho Range Sheep Production Efficiency Research People & Locations







Boyd L Leonard
                        Range Sheep Production Efficiency Research

                        




                        
                        Agricultural Science Research Technician (Animal Science)
                        Phone: (208) 374-5306
                        
                        
                        Fax: (208) 374-5582(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Radiologix, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard J. Sabolik, Senior Vice President and 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, to the best of my knowledge 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.





|                                                                     |  | 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/    RICHARD J. SABOLIK                                           
|                                                                    
|Richard J. Sabolik Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



Dated: May 7, 2004





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Radiologix, Inc. and will be retained by Radiologix, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Oswind David, Appellant.

[943 NYS2d 614]—

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chambers, J.), rendered February 8, 2007, convicting him of assault in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the convictions of assault in the first degree and the sentences imposed thereon are vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for a new trial on the counts of the indictment charging the defendant with assault in the second degree.

On January 2, 2006, the defendant was involved in an altercation during which he allegedly cut Rudolph Harper and Bevan Caesar with a box cutter. As a result, the defendant was charged with, inter alia, four counts of assault in the first degree *(see*Penal Law § 120.10 [1], [2]) (two counts as to each of the two victims), and four counts of assault in the second degree *(see*Penal Law § 120.05 [1], [2]) (two counts as to each of the two victims). Prior to trial, the court dismissed the counts of the indictment charging the defendant with assault in the first degree under Penal Law § 120.10 (1). However, these counts were mistakenly submitted to the jury and included on the verdict sheet. In addition, the verdict sheet did not correspond with the Supreme Court’s jury instructions regarding the counts of assault in the first degree for conduct directed at Bevan Caesar.

The defendant’s conviction of assault in the first degree under Penal Law § 120.10 (1) for conduct directed at Rudolph Harper must be vacated since that count was dismissed prior to trial and was mistakenly submitted to the jury *(see People v Long,*56 AD3d 685 [2008]; *People v Flores,*43 AD3d 955 [2007]; *People v Romero,*309 AD2d 953 [2003]; *People v Smiley,*303 AD2d 425, 426 [2003]).

Further, it cannot be determined on this record whether the jury intended to convict the defendant of the previously *1032dismissed count of assault in the first degree for conduct directed at Bevan Caesar *(see*Penal Law § 120.10 [1]), or the properly submitted count of assault in the first degree *(see*Penal Law § 120.10 [2]). Thus, the defendant’s conviction of assault in the first degree for conduct directed at Bevan Caesar must be vacated *(see People v McNab,*167 AD2d 858, 858 [1990]).

The jury was instructed not to consider the counts of assault in the second degree if it found the defendant guilty of assault in the first degree. Since the counts of assault in the second degree were submitted to the jury but not considered because the jury found the defendant guilty of assault in the first degree, retrial on the assault in the second degree counts will not violate double jeopardy principles *(see People v Charles, 78*NY2d 1044 [1991]; *Matter of Lazartes v Walsh,*36 AD3d 917, 918 [2007]). Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for a new trial on the counts of assault in the second degree.

In light of our determination, we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Florio, J.E, Belen, Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 1 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 2 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 3 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 4 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 5 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 6 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 7 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 8 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 9 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 10 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 11 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 12 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 13 of 14

Case 1:03-cv-04548   Document 7    Filed 07/22/03   Page 14 of 14
<PAGE>
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Land O'Lakes, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on May 14, 2003 (the "Report"), I, John E. Gherty, Chief
Executive 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 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.


                                          By  /s/ John E. Gherty
                                          ----------------------
                                          John E. Gherty
                                          President
                                          and Chief Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-0161

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

JACOB LEE OVERLEASE,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing, and there being no objection from the State;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including April 8, 2022 within which to prepare, file, and 

serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

March 4 2022

03/04/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0161
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTHCOURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-06-006-CV

NO. 2-06-155-CV

Ex Parte S.R.D., a child

In the Interest of B.G.D. a/k/a S.R.D., A Child	APPELLANT

	----------

	FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY	NO. 2-006  -04400                  -CV

JOSEPH H. LEE, III, VIRGINIA K. LEE AND 	APPELLANTS

PATRICIA LEE BARROW AND SAVINGS 

OF AMERICA, INC.		   APPELLANT	

	V.

 OPAL LEE, IN HER CAPACITY AS 	APPELLEE

 TEMPORARY ADMINISTRATOR OF 

THE ESTATE OF DALE T. LEE, DECEASED	

	----------

	FROM THE         PROBATE DISTRICT COURT  NO. 2 OF                    TARRANT COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered appellant’s [s’]’ “Motion To Dismiss aAppealNotice Of Nonsuit.”  It is the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the appeal.  See TEX. R. APP. P.Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

	Costs of the appeal shall be paid by the appellants [ [s][- [oOR the the party incurring the same], for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P.Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D:  

    HOLMAN, GARDNER, and WALKER                                     , JJ.

DELIVERED:    September 28, 2006  

	COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-10-009              -CV

FoOrRtT WoOrRtThH BeEaAuUtTyY ScChHoOoOlL, InNcC.	APPELLANT	

	V.

RiIcChHaArRdD MiIlLbBuUrRnN AcCaAdDeEmMyY 	APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM THE         DISTRICT COURT CoOuUnNtTyY CoOuUrRtT aAtT LaAwW NoO. 2 OF TARRANT                     COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	We have considered “aaAppellant’s   [s’] “Motion To Dismiss AppealWith Prejudice.”  It is the court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

	Costs of the appeal shall be paid by appellant[s], for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d). [OR the party incurring the same, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.]

								PER CURIAM

PANEL:  S DAUPHINOT, GARDERNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DELIVERED:  March 245, 2010
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 20

- 00058

- CV IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF KENNETH CURTIS ANDREWS, DECEASED , Appellant
From the 81st Judicial District Court , Wilson County, Texas Trial Court No. 18

- 04

- 0239

- CVW Honorable Sid L. Harle , Judge Presiding
BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ , JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. Costs of appeal are assessed again st Vincent Doebbler. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 43.4.
SIGNED June 9 , 2021.

_____________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela , Justice