alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Improvement and Protection Research: Salinas, CA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Salinas, California Crop Improvement and Protection Research People & Locations







Shulu  Zhang
                        Crop Improvement and Protection Research

                        




                        
                        Research Molecular Biologist
                        Phone: (831) 755-2843
                        
                        
                        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
#### TOWNSEND et al., Respondents, v. CHAPIN et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

September 9, 1896.)

Action by Samuel C. Townsend and others against George A. Chapin and others.

B. Jb. Winters, for appellants.

G. H. Fuller, for respondents.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
#### BAKER v. GEORGI et al.

(Supreme Court. Appellate Division, First Department.

January 24, 1896.)

Action by ¡Francis T. Baker against Sarah F. Georgi and others.

No opinion. Motion denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN RE

JAVIER RIVERA FRANCO

,

Relator. §

§

§

§ No

. 08

- 2 4

- 00 127

- C R

AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

IN MANDAMUS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Javier Rivera Franco

, proceeding pro se, petitions this Court for writ of mandamus

to compel the Honorable Judge Lela Mays of the 283 rd District Court in Dallas County, Texas

, to

rule on or respond to his motion for judgment nunc pro tunc

. We dismiss this proceeding for want

of subject

- matter jurisdiction.

In 2007, this Court issued an opinion on the merits in Franco ’ s direct appeal affirming the

trial court ’ s judgment. 1 Franco v. State

, No. 08

- 06

- 00280

- CR, 2007 WL 2200468 (Tex. App.

—

El Paso Aug. 2, 2007, pet. ref ’ d) (mem. op., not designated for publication). His direct appeal was

transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalization efforts.

1 This Court issued opinions in three companion cases

, all of which were tried together in the trial court. Franco v.

State

, No. 08

- 06

- 00280

- CR, 2007 WL 2200468, * 1 n.1 (Tex. App.

— El Paso Aug. 2, 2007, pet. ref ’ d) (mem. op., not

designated for publication) (listing companion cases)

.2

See Tex. Gov ’ t Code Ann. § 73.001

. Franco now seeks mandamus relief against Judge Lela Mays

relating to the same underlying proceedings.

Franco ’ s petition seeking a writ of mandamus is an original appellate proceeding which is

distinct from his direct appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. This Court has the authority to issue writs of

mandamus against a judge of a district, statutory county, sta tutory probate county, or county court

in the court of appeals district and all writs necessary to enforce our own jurisdiction. Tex. Gov ’ t

Code Ann. § 22.221(a), (b). Dallas County is in t he Fifth Court of Appeals District and is not in

our appellate district

. Compare i d. § 22.201(f) (listing the counties comprising the Fifth District),

with i d. § 22.201(i) (listing the counties comprising the Eighth District )

. Moreover, because

Relator ’ s underlying criminal case that was before us is long since final, there is no action that we

need take to enforce our own jurisdiction. See In re Jackson

, No. 08

- 21

- 00033

- CV

, 2021 WL

732857, at *2 (Tex. App.

— El Paso Feb. 25, 2021, orig

. proceeding ) (mem. op., not designated for

publication) (dismissing a petition for writ of mandamus on the same grounds)

. Therefore, we are

without the authority to issue writ and must dismiss this proceeding

. 2

JEFF ALLEY

, Chief Justice

May 20, 2024

Before Alley, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.

2 We note that Relator filed a mand amus with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals i n February 2024

, that sought

similar relief against Judge Mays

. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied the writ without written order

. In Re

Franco

, WR

- 72,017

- 16 ( Tex. Crim. App. March 27, 2024)

.
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
 Plant Science Research: St. Paul, MN
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area St. Paul, Minnesota Plant Science Research People & Locations







Shelby  Brendler
                        Plant Science Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Laboratory Technical
                        Phone: (612) 625-7005
                        
                        
                        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
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-10-00237-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF

M.A.R., A.R., A.R., I.R., AND J.R., CHILDREN

From the County Court at Law

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 77,521-CCL

MEMORANDUM OPINION

After Appellant’s parental rights to her five children were terminated following a 

jury trial, Appellant filed a motion for new trial and sought indigent status for appeal. 

The trial court denied the motion for new trial, found her appeal to be frivolous, and 

overruled her claim of indigence. See TEX. FAM. CODE ANN. § 263.405(d) (Vernon 2008). 

Appellant’s counsel then withdrew. We abated this appeal for a hearing in the trial 

court to appoint counsel to appeal the trial court’s indigence and frivolousness 

determinations if it found that Appellant had not abandoned this appeal.

The trial court appointed counsel for Appellant, and appointed counsel has filed

an Anders brief with us and a motion to withdraw in the trial court. Appointed counsel 

asserts that he has diligently reviewed the available record and the issues in Appellant’s 
In the Interest of M.A.R. Page 2

statement of points and that, in his opinion, the appeal of the trial court’s frivolousness 

finding is frivolous.1 See Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 

(1967); In re E.L.Y., 69 S.W.3d 838, 841 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002, order) (applying Anders

to termination appeal).

Although informed of her right to do so, Appellant did not file a pro se brief or 

response to the Anders brief.

In an Anders case, we must, “after a full examination of all the proceedings, [] 

decide whether the case is wholly frivolous.” Anders, 386 U.S. at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; 

accord Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 509-11 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). An appeal is 

“wholly frivolous” or “without merit” when it “lacks any basis in law or fact.” McCoy 

v. Court of Appeals, 486 U.S. 429, 439 n.10, 108 S.Ct. 1895, 1902 n.10, 100 L.Ed.2d 440 

(1988).

We have conducted an independent review of the record, and because we find 

this appeal to be wholly frivolous, we affirm the trial court’s order of termination.

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed May 11, 2011

[CV06]

 

1 Because none of the issues in the statement of points challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the 

absence of a reporter’s record from the trial does not raise a due-process concern. See, e.g., In re S.T., 242 

S.W.3d 923, 925 (Tex. App.—Waco 2008, order). Furthermore, appointed counsel has not requested the 

reporter’s record from the trial. See id. at 925 n.1.
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
 Soil Management and Sugarbeet Research: Fort Collins, CO
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                                    Software
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Fort Collins, Colorado Center for Agricultural Resources Research Soil Management and Sugarbeet Research People & Locations







Erin  Grogan
                        Soil Management and Sugarbeet Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Science Aid
                        Phone: (970) 492-7212
                        
                        
                        Fax: (970) 492-7213(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
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 Genetics and Breeding Research: Tifton, GA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Southeast Biomass Research Center
                    Forage & Turf ResearchSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Tifton, Georgia Crop Genetics and Breeding Research People & Locations







William H Wilson, Jr.

(Billy)
                        Crop Genetics and Breeding Research

                        




                        
                        Agricultural Science Research Technician (Plants)
                        Phone: (229) 387-2369
                        
                        
                        Fax: (229) 387-2321(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
#### Vincent SCHREIBER and Philip Karnazes, Plaintiffs, v. Major Henry O. WICK, Jr., Commanding Officer, 36th Medical Service Squadron, Chicago, Illinois, et al., Defendants.

No. 73 C 1081.

United States District Court, N. D. Illinois, E. D.

July 20, 1973.

*194Stephen J. Culliton, Civinelli & Culliton, Addison, Ill., for plaintiffs.

James R. Thompson, U. S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., for defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

BAUER, District Judge.

This cause comes on the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.

This is a civil action for preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and for a declaratory judgment. Plaintiffs, members of the Air Force Reserve, request that defendants be enjoined from enforcing an Air Force Regulation which prohibits Reservists, with certain exceptions, from wearing wigs to cover long hair while attending drills. Plaintiffs further request that the challenged regulation be declared to be in excess of the Defendant’s statutory authority and unconstitutional.

The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1346(a) (2) and 2201, 2202. The amount in controversy exclusive of interest and costs exceeds the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00).

It is the opinion of this Court after examining the pleadings and relevant case law that a preliminary injunction should be granted against the defendants in order to protect the putative rights and military status of the plaintiffs until this Court decides the issues in question. There is a twofold basis for this ruling.

First, there is a recent trend in the case law which would seem to support the proposition advocated by the plaintiffs. In so far as members of the Armed Forces Reserves are concerned, who under their contracts are allowed to work and live in civilian society for the vast majority of the time, the right to wear their hair as they please is not so trivial as to be denied without sufficient service-connected reason. See Friedman v. Froehlke, 470 F.2d 1351 (1st Cir. 1972); Harris v. Kaine, 352 F.Supp. 769 (S.D.N.Y.1972); cf. Anderson v. Laird, 437 F.2d 912 (7th Cir. 1971).

Second, the United States Army in a recent change to Army Regulation 600-20 (chapter 5) granted to Army reservists exactly what these Air Force reservists seek. The conflicting policy between branches of military service concerning the grooming of reservists might well involve constitutional problems of equal protection and due process.

The Plaintiffs’ motion for a Preliminary Injunction is granted. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that until the issues of the instant action are resolved the defendants Major Henry O. Wick, Jr., Robert Seamans, and the United States of America, their agents, servants, employees and attorneys are enjoined from enforcing any Air Force Regulation which prohibits plaintiffs while attending drills as United States Air Force Reservists from wearing wigs to cover long hair.
#### Tyler McNaier, Respondent, *v.*The Manhattan Railway Company, Appellant.

(Argued October 23, 1890;

decided December 2, 1890.)

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered upon an order made February 11, 1889, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and affirmed an order denying a motion for a new trial.

*Brainard Tolles*for appellant.

*Joseph S. Wood*for respondent.

Agree to affirm; no opinion.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that 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. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50776 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. FELIPE RAMIREZ, also known as Felipe Ramirez-Gloria Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:06-CR-546-ALL
Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE, and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, F elipe Ramirez raises arguments that are foreclosed by A lmendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 12, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
EXHIBIT 11Thefollowing table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share:                   (Expressed in U.S. Currency)      Three months ended September 30,  Nine months ended September 30,   2007  2006  2007  2006 Numerator:                Net (loss) $(810,041) $(420,116) $(1,654,018) $(1,648,504)Dividends on Series A preferred stock  (366)  (432)  (1,086)  (2,159)                              Numerator for basic and diluted losspershare loss available to commonshareholders $(810,407) $(420,548) $(1,655,104) $(1,650,663)                              Denominator:                Denominator for basic loss per share-weighted average shares outstanding  12,637,735   12,671,613   12,637,735   13,007,012 Effect of dilutive securities  —   —   —   — Warrants  —   —   —   —                               Dilutive potential common sharesdenominatorfor diluted earnings (loss) pershare adjustedweighter-average shares and assumedconversion  12,637,735   12,671,613   12,637,735   13,007,012                               Basic (loss) per share $(0.06) $(0.03) $(0.13) $(0.13)                              Diluted (loss) per share $(0.06) $(0.03) $(0.13) $(0.13)
Order filed May 6, 2014 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00950-CR

____________

SHANNON JOE CHAUNCEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 230th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1365315

ORDER

This court has determined, pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 

34.5(f) and 34.6(g)(2), that it must inspect the original of State's exhibit 60, a 

video.
The clerk of the 230th District Court is directed to deliver to the Clerk of this 

court the original of State's exhibit 60, a video, on or before June 5, 2014. The 

Clerk of this court is directed to receive, maintain, and keep safe this original 

exhibit; to deliver it to the justices of this court for their inspection; and, upon 

completion of inspection, to return the original of State's exhibit 60, a video, to the 

clerk of the 230th District Court.

PER CURIAM