alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-20703) pertaining to the 1993 Incentive Stock Plan of
SoloPoint, Inc. of our report dated Febraury 10, 1997, with respect to the
financial statements of SoloPoint, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-
KSB) for the year ended December 31, 1996.

                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Palo Alto, California
March 28, 1997
Exhibit 32.1



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 Secure Computing Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John E. McNulty, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ John E. McNulty                            
|John E. McNulty                                
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|December 6, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Kelly, Appellant.

[946 NYS2d 914]

Appeal from a resentence of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony E Aloi, J.), rendered October 1, 2009. Defendant was resentenced upon his conviction of assault in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the resentence so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law, the original sentence is reinstated and the matter is remitted to Onondaga County Court for proceedings pursuant to CPL 470.45.

*1689Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a resentence pursuant to which, following a hearing, County Court sentenced him to a five-year period of postrelease supervision. As the People correctly concede, the court erred in imposing a period of post-release supervision after defendant had been conditionally released from the previously imposed determinate sentence of incarceration. Inasmuch as he had been released from custody, defendant had *“a*legitimate expectation that the sentence, although illegal under the Penal Law, [was] final and the Double Jeopardy Clause prevents a court from modifying the sentence to include a period of postrelease supervision” *(People v Williams,*14 NY3d 198, 219-220 [2010], *cert denied*562 US —, 131 S Ct 125 [2010]; *see People v Viehdeffer,*75 AD3d 1112, 1113 [2010]). Present — Scudder, P.J., Carni, Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
Listen

# States and Territories Currently Seeking Nominations and Applicants

The Commission has established an Advisory Committee in every state, the District of Columbia, and the five U.S. territories. These committees serve as the Commission’s eyes and ears and advise the Commission about civil rights matters in their states. 

Committee members are recruited from a broad cross-section of professional, educational, and political backgrounds. The Commission is especially interested in appointing individuals with diverse viewpoints who have a demonstrated interest in the various civil rights issues that fall within the Commission’s jurisdiction, as well as individuals who can approach these issues from diverse personal and professional experiences. Commissioners vote on individual appointments to the advisory committees based on recommendations from the staff director. 

## States and Territories Seeking Members

                      - Alabama
                      - Alaska
                      - Idaho
                      - Michigan
                      - Montana
                      - New Hampshire
                      - New Jersey
                      - North Dakota
                      - Rhode Island
                      - Vermont
                      - American Samoa

## Responsibilities and Term of Service

Committee members are expected to make meaningful contributions to the Committee in its development of projects and creation of reports for the Commission. Committees meet on average every quarter, but Committees amid a project may meet monthly. Members who miss two consecutive meetings may be subject to constructive resignation from the Committee.

The term of service for a committee member is four years with a total duration of not more than eight years (or two four-year terms) unless there is sufficient basis for extending the appointment to 12 years. 

## Applying for Membership

Individuals interested in serving and capable of fulfilling the expectations of being an Advisory Committee member are invited to apply at the links below:
                      - General Advisory Committee Application  
                      - Pacific Island Application  
                      - USVI Application

Note: you will be required to upload a current resume and provide a 500 word or less statement on your experience or qualifications for appointment. Please have these prepared prior to starting the application. Incomplete applications will not be processed.

Prior to participating in Committee activity, you will also be required to fill out a Confidential Conflict-of-Interest Statement to help USCCR personnel identify and resolve potential and apparent conflicts.  

For questions about membership on an Advisory Committee or how to complete the application, contact David Mussatt, Supervisory Chief of Regional Programs at dmussatt@usccr.gov or (312) 353-8311 x 10
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         453,398
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  717,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    220,345
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,906,858
<PP&E>                                       4,359,935
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,258,113)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,252,177
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,753,275
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    353,200
<COMMON>                                        33,344
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,726,171
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,252,177
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            19,884,974
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,440,134
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             136,371
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                299,913
<INCOME-TAX>                                    80,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            219,913
<DISCONTINUED>                             (2,551,762)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,331,849)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.71)
        


</TABLE>
AVALON RESERVOIRLatitude: 32.491Longitude: -104.252Elevation: 3160

AVALON RESERVOIR

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Sierra Blanca Site Page...



Sierra Blanca

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Adams Ranch #1 Site Page...



Adams Ranch #1

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Wesner Springs Site Page...



Wesner Springs

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Elk Cabin Site Page...



Elk Cabin

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Santa Fe Site Page...



Santa Fe
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES–OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Robert B. Ladd, President
and Chief Executive Officer of MGT Capital Investments, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10–Q of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2016 (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              
| | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                                         



|November 14, 2016 | By: | /s/ ROBERT B. LADD           
|----------------- | --- | -----------------------------
|                  |     | Robert B. Ladd               
|                  |     | Chief Executive Officer      
|                  |     | (Principal Executive Officer)
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 30, 2020

No. 04

- 19

- 00561

- CR

Frank Lee OLIVA

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 218th Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17

- 08

- 0432

- CRA

Honorable Russell Wilson, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s court

- appointed attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California

, 368 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal.

Counsel has informed the appellant of h is right to file h is own brief and provided appellant with

a form motion for requesting the appellate record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 20

(Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 85 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, no pet.); Bruns v. State , 924 S.W.2d 176, 177 n.1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1996, no pet.). The
State has filed a letter waiving its right to file an appellee’s brief unless the appellant files a pro

se brief.

If appellant desires to file a pro se brief in th is appeal , he must do so within t hirty days

from the date of this order. See Bruns , 924 S.W.2d at 177 n.1. If the appellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief no later than t hirty days after the date appellant’s pro

se brief is filed in this court. We ORDER the motion to withdraw, filed by appellant’s counsel in

th is appeal , to be HELD IN ABEYANCE pending further order of the court.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, JusticeIN WIT NESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 30th day of January, 2020

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz

, Clerk of Co urt
USGS 11519500 - SCOTT R NR FORT JONES, CALatitude: 41.641Longitude: -123.014Elevation: 2623.80

USGS 11519500 - SCOTT R NR FORT JONES, CA

Courtesy NRCS - Go to Big Red Mountain Site Page...



Big Red Mountain
Page	1 – May	4,	Joint	discovery	status	report

ROBERT W. RAINWATER, Oregon State Bar No. 084489

Email: rrainwater@rainwaterlaw.org

Rainwater Law Group

1327 SE Tacoma Street, Suite 239

Portland, Oregon 97202-6639

Telephone: (971) 271-7566

Fax: (503) 231-8276

Attorney for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

PORTLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

Ammon Bundy, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 3:16-cr-000510-BR

Pursuant to the Court’s April 11, 2016, Order (ECF No. 389) and its April 15, 2016, 

Order (ECF No. 422), attorneys for the Defendant’s Discovery Committee have conferred with 

the Government. The parties offer the following:

On Monday, May 2, 2016, the government produced hard drives with four volumes of 

discovery (Volume 12-15, the previous 11 Volumes had been provided to defense counsel). The 

four volumes included 793GB of data in 160,840 files. There were 4,527 Bates numbers. This 

production included evidence items and FBI reports.

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 513 Filed 05/04/16 Page 1 of 2
Page	2 – May	4,	Joint	discovery	status	report

The Government expects the next production to be available to the defense on Friday or 

Monday. It will contain additional FBI reports and evidence items and will be in excess of

500GB.

Mr. Blomgren, represented by Robert Rainwater, has received the first 15 Volumes of 

discovery from the government. Ms. Wood for Mr. Ritzheimer is still awaiting delivery of 

Volumes 12 through 15 by FedEx. All defense counsel will have access to the discovery 

services of DTI on Wednesday of next week, the 11th of May.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 4th of May, 2016.

s/ Robert W. Rainwater

Robert W. Rainwater

OSB # 084489

(971) 271-7566

Attorney for Defendants

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 513 Filed 05/04/16 Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES v. Walter R. LARKIN, III, [ XXX XX XXXX ], Private (E-1), U. S. Marine Corps.

NCM 77 0072.

U. S. Navy Court of Military Review.

Sentence Adjudged 16 Nov. 1976.

Decided 28 Jan. 1977.

Before CEDARBURG, C. J., and BAUM and GLASGOW, JJ.

GLASGOW, Judge:

Consonant with his plea, the appellant was found guilty of absence without leave from 6 March 1967 until 13 September 1976, and sentenced on 16 November 1976, by military judge sitting alone as a special court-martial, to a bad conduct discharge, confinement at hard labor for two months and forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month for two months. On 7 December 1976, the convening authority approved the sentence and suspended, on probation, the confinement in excess of two days. He also stated *1111that forfeitures should apply from the date of his action. On 22 December 1976, the supervisory authority modified the findings as to the unit from which the appellant was absent, reduced the forfeitures to $249.00 pay per month for one month, but otherwise approved the sentence as approved by the convening authority. Inasmuch as the punitive discharge was not suspended, the sentence was not ordered into execution. Article 71(c), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 871(c).

Paragraph 88d(3), MCM, 1969 (Rev.), states, in pertinent part, as follows:

> . if the sentence to confinement is to be suspended, any approved forfeitures may not be *applied*until the sentence is ordered into execution.

I consider application of forfeitures prior to the execution of the sentence when the confinement or a portion thereof is suspended to be contrary to the provisions of paragraphs 88d (3) and 126A (5), MCM, 1969 (Rev.). *United States v. Lock,*15 U.S.C.M.A. 574, 36 C.M.R. 72 (1965); *United States*v. *Sosville,*22 U.S.C.M.A. 317, 46 C.M.R. 317 (1973). I believe that the provisions of the Manual prohibiting application of forfeitures when the confinement is suspended should be followed or changed by executive order.

However, in the case *sub judice,*the appellant enlisted in the Marine Corps on 11 July 1966 for four years and absented himself for almost ten years from 6 March 1967. His absence ended on 13 September 1976 when he was apprehended by an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The record shows that the appellant was confined upon his return to military control and has not been restored to duty. The Department of Defense, Military Pay and Allowances, Entitlements Manual, Section 10316(6), provides:

> Absentee. An enlisted member, whose term of enlistment or induction terminates while he is in a status of absence without leave or desertion, is not entitled to pay and allowances upon his return to military control while awaiting trial and disposition of his case, if his conviction becomes final and his return to full duty has never been effected.

Therefore, the question of application of forfeitures appears academic. Accordingly, the findings and sentence approved on review below are affirmed.

Chief Judge CEDARBURG and Judge BAUM concur in the result.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

CHARLES ADAMS
, Appellant,

v.

CLAUDINE ADAMS
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 264

[ February 20, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Kathleen J. Kroll , Judge; L.T. Case No.
502012DR011848AXXNB

.

Andrea Cox and John A. Turner of Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP, Miami, for appellant.

Steven M. Katzman and Craig A. Rubinstein of Katzman, Wasserman, Bennardini & Rubinstein, P.A., Boca Raton, for appel lee.

G ERBER
, C.J.

The former husband appeals from the circuit court’s “Second Order on

True

- Up/Equalizing Payment” and the circuit court’s later order denying the former husband’s “Motion for Rehearing of Second Order on True

Up/Equalizing Payment.” Th e former husband primarily argued in the motion for rehearing that the “Second Order,” entered eight months after the evidentiary hearing on which the order was based, did not credit certain expenses which the former husband continued to pay after the
evid entiary hearing, up to the time the “Second Order” was entered and
thereafter.

We affirm the “Second Order

, ” because until the former husband filed his motion for rehearing, the former husband had not requested the circuit court to credit certain expenses which the former husband continued to pay after the evidentiary hearing up to the time the “Second Order” was
entered and thereafter.2 However, because the motion for rehearing ultimately rais ed this request, the circuit court erred in summarily denying t he motion

, which
appears to merely seek relief consistent with the findings and conclusions in the “Second Order,” that is, credit for certain expenses which the former husband continued to pay after the evidentiary hearing

, up to the time the
“Second Order” was entered and thereafter

.

We remand for the circuit court to reconsider the former husband’s motion for rehearing on its merits. We caution the parties and the circuit court that any ord er entered on the motion for rehearin g should address credit to be given for any future payments beyond that order as well, rather than perpetuating piecemeal disposition and appeals of future payments.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded

.

C IKLIN and K UNTZ
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-81,919-01

EX PARTE RICKY LOCKRIDGE, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 09-01048-CRF-272 IN THE 272 DISTRICT COURT ND

FROM BRAZOS COUNTY

Per curiam. Yeary, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of two counts of

online solicitation of a minor and he was sentenced to six years’ imprisonment on each count, to run

concurrently. He did not appeal his conviction. 

This Court, in Ex parte Lo, held unconstitutional the online solicitation of a minor statute for

which Applicant was convicted. Ex parte Lo, 424 S.W.3d 10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013). Applicant

filed this habeas application based on the Lo decision and asks that both counts of his conviction be
2

set aside. The trial court recommends that relief be granted in this cause. We agree. 

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 09-01048-CRF-272, in the 272 District Court nd

of Brazos County is set aside and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Brazos

County to answer the charges as set out in the indictment so that the indictment may be disposed of

in accordance with this Court’s opinion in Ex parte Lo. The trial court shall issue any necessary

bench warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the TexasDepartment ofCriminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: February 10, 2016

Do not publish
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD

UNITED STATES COAST GUARD,

Complainant,

YS.

SHAMIR JAMEIL FORD,

Respondent,

Bv: Honorable George J. Jordan, Administrative Law Judqe

Appearances:

PAUL LONARDO

USCG Sector Houston/Galveston

For the Coast Guard

SHAMIR JAN{EIL FORD. Pra .se

For the Respondent

Docket Number 2023-003f

CG Enforcement Activity Number 7619443

CONSENT ORDER

Issued: Mav 25.2023
o P o G NT A

OnMay lr5.2023.

Settlement Agreement and

under 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

the parties in this case submitted an Amended Motion for Approval of

Entry ofConsent order to be approved as a settrement ofrhe case

I have carefully reviewed the terms ofthe Settlement Agreement and find it is fair and

reasonable and in substantial compliance with the requirements of 33 C.F.R. $ 20.502.

ORDtrR

Upon consideration of the record, it is hereby ORDERED, the Settlement Agreement is

APPROVED in fulland incorporated herein by reference. This Consent Order shallconstitute

full. final, and complete adjudication of this proceeding.

SO ORDERED.

Done and dated May 25,2023,

Seattle, Washington

George J. Jordan

Administrative Law Judge

United States Coast Guard

-z&-