alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Haley M.T., Appellant. Penn Yan Central School District, Respondent.

[947 NYS2d 257]

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Yates County (W. Patrick Falvey, J.), entered March 15, 2011 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 7. The order, among other things, adjudged that respondent is a person in need of supervision.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal from the order insofar as it concerned placement is unanimously dismissed and the order is otherwise affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: On appeal from an order adjudicating her a person in need of supervision (PINS) and placing her in the custody of the Commissioner of Social Services for a period of one year, respondent contends that Family Court failed to advise her of her right to remain silent at the dispositional hearing *(see*Family Ct Act § 741 [a]), that the order of fact-finding and disposition fails to comply with section 754 (2), and that placement is not an appropriate disposition. Those contentions are moot because the placement order expired on March 7, 2012 *(see Matter of Todd B.,*4 AD3d 650 [2004]; *Matter of Shannon R.,*278 AD2d 939 [2000]), “and this matter does not fall within the exception[ ] to the mootness doctrine” *(Shannon R.,*278 AD2d 939). Despite the expiration of respondent’s placement, however, her challenge to the underlying PINS adjudication is not moot *(see Matter of Sonya LL.,*53 AD3d 727, 728 [2008]).

*1550Respondent further contends that the order should be reversed and the petition dismissed because the court failed to comply with Family Court Act § 742 (b), which “require[s] the Court to review the prepetition services” at the initial appearance (Sobie, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Ct Act § 742, at 107; *see also*§ 735). That contention is raised for the first time on appeal, and thus respondent failed to preserve it for our review *(see generally Matter of Alexander C.,*83 AD3d 1058, 1059 [2011]; *Matter of Vanessa S.,*20 AD3d 924 [2005]). In any event, respondent’s contention lacks merit. The petition and documents attached thereto establish that petitioner complied with the substantive statutory requirements of Family Court Act §§ 732 and 735 *(see Matter of Mercedes M.M.,*52 AD3d 1210, 1211 [2008]; *cf. Matter of Nicholas R.Y. [Joanne Y.],*91 AD3d 1321, 1322 [2012]; *Matter of James L.*[appeal No. 2], 74 AD3d 1775, 1775-1776 [2010]; *Matter of Rajan M.,*35 AD3d 863, 864-865 [2006]), and the court’s comments at the initial appearance demonstrate that the court had reviewed petitioner’s efforts to divert this case pursuant to section 735. Contrary to respondent’s further contention, she received meaningful representation *(see Matter of Elijah D. [Allison D.],*74 AD3d 1846, 1847 [2010]; *Matter of Grabiel V.,*59 AD3d 1132, 1133 [2009], *lv denied*12 NY3d 711 [2009]).

Respondent failed to take an appeal from the order settling the record, and her contentions with respect to that order therefore are not properly before us *(see Oubre v Carpenter,*241 AD2d 964, 965 [1997]). Present — Smith, J.P., Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
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
 National Germplasm Resources Laboratory: Beltsville, MD
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    References
                        Plant Inventory Books
                                    Atlas of Guatamalan Crop Wild Relatives
                    NewsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Beltsville, Maryland (BARC) Beltsville Agricultural Research Center National Germplasm Resources Laboratory People & Locations







Kurt  Endress
                        National Germplasm Resources Laboratory

                        




                        
                        Contractor
                        Phone:    
                        
                        
                        Fax: (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
Filed 6/24/21 P. v. Atkins CA2/5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions 

not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion 

has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

GENE ATKINS,

Defendant and Appellant.

B306143

(Los Angeles County Super. 

Ct. No. BA227949)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los 

Angeles County, Laura F. Priver, Judge. Dismissed.

Cynthia L. Barnes, under appointment by the Court of 

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance by for Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________________
2

In 2002, defendant was convicted of multiple counts of 

criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422) and a single count of stalking 

(§ 646.9, subd. (b)).1 The court sentenced him to a lengthy prison 

term. In addition, the court required defendant to pay a 

restitution fine of $10,000 (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and imposed and 

suspended an identical parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45).

In April 2020, defendant filed a motion to amend the 

abstract to eliminate the fines, apparently relying on an order 

issued by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

2 The 

trial court denied the motion. Defendant filed a timely notice of 

appeal of the denial of this postjudgment motion. 

On appeal, appointed counsel filed a brief indicating an 

inability to identify any appealable issues, and requesting this 

court follow the procedures of People v. Serrano (2012) 

211 Cal.App.4th 496. Under Serrano, when a defendant appeals 

from a postjudgment order, and counsel has found no arguable 

issues, the court is to inform defendant of his right to file a 

supplemental brief. Thereafter, the court will either retain the 

appeal or dismiss it as abandoned. (Id. at pp. 503-504.)

On April 13, 2021, we informed defendant of his right to file 

a supplemental brief under Serrano. Appointed counsel also 

informed defendant of his right to file a supplemental brief. The 

time has expired and defendant has filed no brief. Dismissal of 

the appeal is warranted. 

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal 

Code.

2 The motion is not part of the record on appeal. The clerk 

conducted a diligent search and could not find it. Defendant’s 

appellate counsel inquired of defendant; he did not have a copy. 
3

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

RUBIN, P. J.

WE CONCUR:

MOOR, J.

KIM, J.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 154 (Friday, August 13, 2021)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 45619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-17551]



[[Page 45617]]

Vol. 86

Friday,

No. 154

August 13, 2021

Part III





The President





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



Presidential Determination No. 2021-10 of August 10, 2021--Continuation 
of U.S. Drug Interdiction Assistance to the Government of Colombia


                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 86 , No. 154 / Friday, August 13, 2021 / 
Presidential Documents

___________________________________________________________________

Title 3--
The President

[[Page 45619]]

                Presidential Determination No. 2021-10 of August 10, 
                2021

                
Continuation of U.S. Drug Interdiction Assistance 
                to the Government of Colombia

                Memorandum for the Secretary of State [and] the 
                Secretary of Defense

                By the authority vested in me as President by the 
                Constitution and the laws of the United States, and 
                pursuant to the authority vested in me by section 1012 
                of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
                Year 1995, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2291-4), I hereby 
                certify, with respect to Colombia, that: (1) 
                interdiction of aircraft reasonably suspected to be 
                primarily engaged in illicit drug trafficking in that 
                country's airspace is necessary, because of the 
                extraordinary threat posed by illicit drug trafficking 
                to the national security of that country; and (2) 
                Colombia has appropriate procedures in place to protect 
                against innocent loss of life in the air and on the 
                ground in connection with such interdiction, which 
                includes effective means to identify and warn an 
                aircraft before the use of force is directed against 
                the aircraft.

                The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to 
                publish this determination in the Federal Register and 
                to notify the Congress of this determination.
                <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
                
                    (Presidential Sig.)

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, August 10, 2021

[FR Doc. 2021-17551
Filed 8-12-21; 11:15 am]
Billing code 4710-10-P
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 114

To repeal the reduction in the deductible portion of expenses for business

meals and entertainment.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 21, 1997

Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. COCHRAN, and Mr. STEVENS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To repeal the reduction in the deductible portion of expenses

for business meals and entertainment.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF REDUCTION IN BUSINESS MEALS

4 AND ENTERTAINMENT TAX DEDUCTION.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 274(n)

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to only

7 50 percent of meal and entertainment expenses allowed

8 as deduction) is amended by striking ‘‘50 percent’’ and

9 inserting ‘‘80 percent’’.
2

•S 114 IS

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The heading for

2 section 274(n) is amended by striking ‘‘50’’ and inserting

3 ‘‘80’’.

4 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

5 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after

6 December 31, 1996.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          36,545
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   77,904
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,658)
<INVENTORY>                                        426
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               123,161
<PP&E>                                          32,011
<DEPRECIATION>                                (18,669)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 207,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           98,630
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           355
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,316
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   207,000
<SALES>                                        184,034
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               184,034
<CGS>                                          106,796
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  106,796
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                89,834
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,651)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (11,651)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,651)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)


</TABLE>
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
 Poisonous Plant Research: Logan, UT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    IACUC SummariesSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Logan, Utah Poisonous Plant Research People & Locations





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Contact Information
- Research Projects
- Publications

Dale R Gardner
                     

                     Research Chemist


                     Phone: (435) 797-4023
                     
                     

                     Fax: (435) 797-4008
                     

                     1150 EAST 1400 NORTH                              
                     POISONOUS PLANT RESEARCH LAB.                     
                     

                     LOGAN                         , UT 84341-000


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
#### In the Matter of Brian F., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[945 NYS2d 878]

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered on or about December 1, 2010, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of sexual abuse in the first and third degrees, and placed him on enhanced supervision probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations. The combination of appellant’s acts and statements supports the conclusion that he had sexual contact with the victim, and that the contact was for the purpose of sexual gratification *(see e.g. Matter of Najee A.,*26 AD3d 258 [2006], *lv denied*7 NY3d 703 [2006]; *Matter of Kenny O.,*276 AD2d 271 [2000], *lv denied*96 NY2d 701 [2001]).

We have considered and rejected appellant’s remaining claims. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Moskowitz, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
**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 **

| (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 result of operations of the              Company. |
|-----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |      |                                                                                                                    |
|--------|-----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | By:  |  /s/ James                  A. Meer                                                                           |
|   |      | James                        A. MeerChief                        Financial OfficerMarch                        28, 2007 |
|   |           |                                                                                                                    |

----
* Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of

opinions that merely decide particular cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-40633 Conference Calendar

__________________
JIHAAD A.M.E. SAAHIR, f/k/a Jehad Abdullah Shabazz, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus W.J. ESTELLE, JR; M.D. HERKLOTZ; E.E. ALFORD; D. LOWRY; DAVID M. BEAGLE; OFFICER SOAPE; JOHN L. LINDSEY, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:83-CV-225

- - - - - - - - - - December 19, 1995 Before DAVIS, STEWART, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * This case is here on a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal. Saahir argues that this court's prior decision never decided whether the tapes were religious or non-religious. He admits that some of the tapes are the same tapes which were the subject of this court's prior decision. He contends that it is not legal for the defendant to determine what kind of musicalNo. 95-40633 -2- tapes he needs to practice his religion. He contends that he has proven that music is part of his religious practices, and that his practices are not necessarily the same as all Muslim sects. He argues that he should have been afforded a hearing so that the district court could determine whether these tapes are a part of his Muslim practices. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no issue of arguable merit. Accordingly, we deny IFP and dismiss the appeal as frivolous. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); Howard v. King , 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. We caution Saahir that any additional frivolous appeals filed by him will invite the imposition of sanctions. To avoid sanctions, Saahir is further cautioned to review any pending appeals to ensure that they do not raise arguments that are frivolous because they have been previously decided by this
court. IFP DENIED, APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS.