alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dismiss and Opinion Filed October 21, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05
- 21
- 00648
- CR MARCO XAVIER RAMIREZ , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296
- 82985
- 2020 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Molberg, Nowell, and Goldstein

Opinion by Justice Nowell On July 20, 2021, Marco Xavier Ramirez filed a pro se notice of appeal, seeking to challenge his conviction for aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon. We dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. The clerk’s record shows that a ppellan t , who was represented by counsel, entered into a negotiated plea bargain with the State. Under the terms, appel lant agreed to plead guilty to aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon, a firearm, and true to the enhancement paragraph in exchange for the State’s agreement to recommend punishment at forty years. As further consideration for the plea bargain, appellant waived his right to appeal. See Blanco v. State , 18 S.W.3d 218, 219

– 20– 2

–

(Tex. Crim. App. 2000). The trial court accepted appellant’s guilty plea , found appellant guilty, and, following the plea agreement, assessed punishment, enhanced by a prior felony conviction, at forty years in prison. The trial court prepared and signed a rule 25.2(d) certification of the right to appeal stating this “is a plea

- bargain case, and [appellant] has NO right to appeal” and appellant “has waived the right of appeal .” See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d). In addition, the trial court noted in the judgment , “APPEAL WAIVED. NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL GRANTED. ” The certification is supported by the documents before the Court. See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 614

– 15 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant waived his right to appeal under the clear terms of the plea agreement, we conclude we lack jurisdiction

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a), (d); Lundgren v. State , 434 S.W.3d 594, 599 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) ( when appellant voluntarily waives right of appeal to secure benefits of plea bargain agreement, subsequent notice of appeal fails to “initiate the appellate process” ). We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

210648f.u05 Do Not Publish T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2(b) /Erin A. Nowell/ / ERIN A. NOWELL JUSTICE– 3

– 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT
MARCO XAVIER RAMIREZ, Appellant
No. 05

- 21

- 00648

- CR V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court, Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296

- 82985

- 2020. Opinion delivered by Justice Nowell. Justices Molberg and Goldstein participating. Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS this appeal.
Judgment entered this 21 st day of October , 2021

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE HEALTHDYNE
INFORMATION ENTERPRISES, INC. CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND THE HEALTHDYNE INFORMATION
ENTERPRISES, INC. CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1996
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           2,717
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,865
<ALLOWANCES>                                        68
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,581
<PP&E>                                           1,595
<DEPRECIATION>                                     396
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,284
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,042
<BONDS>                                          5,276
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           173
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,793
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,284
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,220
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,899
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,304
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 371
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    646
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                646
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       646
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         146,235
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                6,050,393
<ALLOWANCES>                                   524,356
<INVENTORY>                                  4,773,366
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,982,859
<PP&E>                                       1,321,850
<DEPRECIATION>                                 477,205
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              17,284,637
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,158,652
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,920
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,850,406
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                17,284,637
<SALES>                                     32,196,708
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            32,196,708
<CGS>                                       22,043,158
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,966,519
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (100,540)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,712,429)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    19,349
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,731,778)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,731,778)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.38)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

v. 

Duane Leo Ehmer 

Case No. 3:16CR00051- 10-BR 

MODIFICATION OF RELEASE 

CONDITIONS 

IT IS ORDERED THAT the defendant's previously imposed conditions of release be modified 

by removing the following conditions: 

• The defendant shall be monitored by the form oflocation monitoring indicated below and 

shall abide by all technology requirements. The participant shall pay all or part of the 

costs of participation in the location monitoring program as directed by the court and/or 

the pretrial services officer. 

(X) Active OPS Monitoring (including hybrid OPS) 

This form oflocation monitoring technology shall be utilized to monitor the following 

location restriction: 

(X) Home Detention. You are restricted to your residence at all times except for 

employment; education; religious services; medical, substance abuse, or mental health 

treatment, attorney visits; court appearances; court-ordered obligations; or other activities 

as pre-approved by the pretrial services officer. 

• In the event the defendant violates the schedule of location monitoring, cannot be located, 

or violates any program rule of a residential treatment program or community corrections 

center, U.S. Pretrial Services is authorized to notify the United States Marshals Service or 

responsible law enforcement agency who is then commanded to arrest the defendant for 

the violation and bring him/her before a United States Magistrate Judge without 

unnecessary delay. 

All other previously ordered conditions of release remain in full effect. 

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS :2 7 

Submitted by U.S. Pretrial Services 

on able Robe1i E. Jones 

S ior U.S. District Judge 

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 354 Filed 03/29/16 Page 1 of 1
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

FREDERICK C. LEONARD , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 1416

[ January 10, 201 9 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Meenu T. Sasser , Judge; L.T. Case No s

. 50

- 2017

- CF

010425

- AXXX

- MB and 50

- 2017

- CF

- 010429

- AXXX

- MB

.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Alan T. Lipson, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C U RIAM

.
Affirmed.

W ARNER , G ROSS and T AYLOR , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Claudia Renucci, Respondent, v Mercy Hospital, Ap*797pellant, et al., Defendants.

Absent a showing that a party seeking discovery has need of materials in the preparation of the case and is unable without undue hardship to obtain a substantial equivalent by other means, materials prepared "in anticipation of litigation or for trial” are exempt from disclosure (CPLR 3101 [d] [2]). Accordingly, a medical report prepared for litigation remains exempt under the 1985 revision of CPLR 3101 (d) (L 1985, ch 294, § 4; *cf. Hoenig v Westphal,*52 NY2d 605, 608-609; *Zimmerman v Nassau Hosp.,*76 AD2d 921, 922; Siegel, Supplementary Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C3101:29, p 8 [1986 Pocket Part]).

In addition, we agree with Special Term that the Hospital’s request for disclosure of the identity of medical experts was improper and that its request concerning qualifications was excessively detailed (CPLR 3101 [d] [1] [i]). Moreover, the Hospital’s request for the "facts and opinions” upon which the plaintiffs expert was expected to testify was improper, as the Hospital was entitled to only the "substance” thereof (CPLR 3101 [d] [1] [i]). The Hospital’s demand for disclosure posed only one question that was not subject to objection. Under these circumstances the remedy is not a pruning of the demand either by Special Term or this court, but rather vacatur of the entire demand *(see, Nazario v Fromchuck,*90 AD2d 483). Mangano, J. P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<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>                                           2,499
<SECURITIES>                                    11,710
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,584
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      3,031
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,360
<PP&E>                                           2,605
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  28,934
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,438
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        25,516
<OTHER-SE>                                     (6,020)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    28,934
<SALES>                                          8,328
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,328
<CGS>                                            2,333
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,593
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (175)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,423)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,423)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,423)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.21)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.21)


</TABLE>
# L_2009285EN.01004001.xml

| 31.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 285/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 285/40

---

COUNCIL DECISION

of 27 October 2009

appointing one Italian member of the European Economic and Social Committee

(2009/797/EC, Euratom)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 259 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 167 thereof,

Having regard to Council Decisions 2006/524/EC, Euratom (1) and 2006/651/EC, Euratom (2),

Having regard to the proposal of the Italian Government,

Having regard to the opinion of the Commission,

Whereas a member’s seat on the European Economic and Social Committee has become vacant following the end of the term of office of Ms Susanna FLORIO,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

Mr Stefano PALMIERI, responsabile dell’area di ricerca Sviluppo locale e politica industriale dell’IRES CGIL — Istituto di ricerche economiche e sociali Confederazione generale italiana del lavoro (Group II — Employees Group), is hereby appointed as a member of the European Economic and Social Committee for the remainder of the current term of office, which runs until 20 September 2010.

Article 2

This Decision shall take effect on the day of its adoption.

Done at Luxembourg, 27 October 2009.

For the Council

The President

C. BILDT

---

(1)  
  OJ L 207, 28.7.2006, p. 30.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 269, 28.9.2006, p. 13.

2

---
Exhibit 16.3
May 21,  1998  Consent  of  Sherwin D.  Yoelin to use all  information  from his
evaluation reports in this document.





               Sherwin D. Yoelin, Petroleum Engineer, Inc.
                    Consulting Petroleum Engineer
                California Certificate Number P 1241
                       1439 Bonnie Jean Road
                 La Habra Heights, California 90631
                            310 697-3700


May 21, 1998


Geo Petroleum, Inc.
501 Deep Valley Drive, Suite 300
Rolling Hills Estates, CA  90274

Subject:     Consent of Independent Petroleum Engineer

Gentlemen:

I agree to the  inclusion  in this Form  10-KSB of my reports  dated  January 1,
1998,  with  respect to the  proved oil and gas  reserves  and  revenues  of Geo
Petroleum,  Inc.  and consent to the  reference  to our firm under the  captions
"Estimated Oil and Gas Reserves" and "Experts."

Sincerely,

/s/  SHERWIN D. YOELIN
-------------------------
SHERWIN D. YOELIN
Consulting Petroleum Engineer
State of California
Certificate No. P 1241


                                                                              35
#### PATCHEN, Appellant, v. WAEFELAER, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department

December 11, 1896.)

Action by Frederick M. Patchen against Louis Waefelaer. Howard R. Bayne, for appellant. Frank L. Eckerson, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

For the reasons stated in the opinion of Mr. Justice Williams in the case of Patchen v. Rofkar (decided herewith) 42 N. Y. *1130Supp. 35, the judgment appealed from should he reversed, with costs, and with leave to defendant to withdraw demurrer, and answer over on payment of costs in the court below and of this appeal.
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
                                                                                



           HOME HEALTH CORPORATION OF AMERICA, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES

                COMPUTATION OF BASIC AND DILUTED LOSS PER SHARE
                                        
              FOR THE THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997
                                        

The following calculation is submitted in accordance with the Securities Act of
1934:


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
                                               Three months ended                     Six months ended
                                                December 31, 1997                     December 31, 1997
                                       -----------------------------------    ----------------------------------
                                           Basic               Diluted             Basic             Diluted 
                                       --------------    -----------------    --------------    ----------------
                                                        (in thousands, except per share data)
<S>                                    <C>               <C>                  <C>               <C>
Net loss available to common
 stockholders                             $(23,856)           $(23,856)          $(21,828)            $(21,828)
                                       ==============    =================    ==============    ================      

Weighted average number of common
 shares outstanding during period            9,158               9,158              9,153                9,153 
                                                    
Weighted average number of common
 shares subject to exercise under
 outstanding stock options and                                  
 warrants, net of treasury shares                                    
 assumed repurchased (a)                         -                   -                  -                    -
                                       --------------    -----------------    --------------    ----------------
Weighted average number of common
 shares outstanding                           9,158                9,158             9,153                9,153
                                       ==============    =================    ==============    ================      
Net loss per share                           $(2.60)              $(2.60)           $(2.38)              $(2.38)
                                       ==============    =================    ==============    ================      

(a) No shares are assumed outstanding for the diluted calculation as such Shares were anti-dilutive and decreased the 
    loss per Share to $2.57 and $2.35 for the three and six months ended December 31, 1997, respectively.
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1884 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1884

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 25, 2015

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
   at 206 West Commercial Street in East Rochester, New York, as the 
      ``Officer Daryl R. Pierson Memorial Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. OFFICER DARYL R. PIERSON MEMORIAL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 206 West Commercial Street in East Rochester, New York, 
shall be known and designated as the ``Officer Daryl R. Pierson 
Memorial Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Officer 
Daryl R. Pierson Memorial Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 24, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
<PAGE>   1



Exhibit 11.1



                              CARNEGIE GROUP, INC.

                  STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   1998              1997
                                                   ----              ----
<S>                                            <C>                  <C>
Net income (loss)                              $(2,232,000)         $388,000
                                               ============         ========
Weighted average common shares
     outstanding                                  6,497,584        6,278,594
Effect of dilutive shares
     outstanding                                    308,107          674,220
                                                  ---------        ---------
Dilutive shares outstanding                       6,805,691        6,952,814
                                                  =========        =========
Earnings (loss) per common share
     Basic                                          $(0.34)            $0.06
                                                    =======            =====
     Diluted                                        $(0.34)            $0.06
                                                    =======            =====

</TABLE>
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1690 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 29, 2015 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 

Public Works 

AN ACT 

To designate the United States courthouse located at 700 

Grant Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Joseph 

F. Weis Jr. United States Courthouse’’. 

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


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1690 RFS

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION. 

2 The United States courthouse located at 700 Grant 

3 Street in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, shall be known and 

4 designated as the ‘‘Joseph F. Weis Jr. United States 

5 Courthouse’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES. 

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the United 

9 States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed 

10 to be a reference to the ‘‘Joseph F. Weis Jr. United States 

11 Courthouse’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 28, 2015. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS