alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
A92A1690.

#### NEWTON v. THE STATE.

(423 SE2d 707)

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Defendant Newton was convicted on a speeding charge before the municipal court of the City of Doraville. The municipal court fined defendant $75, which fine was paid in full without protest on the date of trial and sentencing. The Superior Court of DeKalb County overruled defendant’s petition for writ of certiorari and defendant appeals. *Held:*

“ ‘Although a court may exercise its discretion to decide a criminal case even after the sentence has been served ((cits.)), it is not bound to do so. (Cits.)’ *Baker v. State,*240 Ga. 431, 432 (241 SE2d 187) (1978). Here, as in *Baker v. State,*supra at 432, if there are any ‘adverse collateral consequences’ resulting from [defendant’s] misdemeanor conviction, [he] ‘has not shown, on this record,’ their existence. Compare *Parris v. State,*232 Ga. 687 (208 SE2d 493) (1974); *Peach v. State,*168 Ga. App. 55 (308 SE2d 60) (1983). Likewise, any ‘question raised (in the instant case) is not one which can never be decided because it inevitably becomes moot prior to an appeal . . .’ *Baker v. State,*supra at 432. This is true because [defendant] was not required to pay the fine so as to avoid the immediate commencement *763of the [12 months] sentence. ‘At no time, either before a court of inquiry, when indicted, after a motion for a new trial is made, or while an appeal is pending, shall any person charged with a misdemeanor be refused bail.’ OCGA § 17-6-1 (a). ‘ “(O)ne convicted (of a misdemeanor) is entitled to bail as a matter of law. (Cits.)” ’ *Holcomb v. State,*129 Ga. App. 86 (198 SE2d 876) (1973). Accordingly, in the absence of any evidence of ‘adverse collateral consequences’ or of ‘inevitable mootness,’ ‘(w)e decline (to exercise our discretion) to reach the merits of this appeal. . . .’ *Baker v. State,*supra at 432. See also *Henry v. State,*148 Ga. App. 712 (252 SE2d 179) (1979). Compare *Chaplin v. State,*141 Ga. App. 788 (234 SE2d 330) (1977).” *Gamble v. State,*181 Ga. App. 871 (354 SE2d 174). See also *Wilson v. State,*202 Ga. App. 160 (413 SE2d 504). As there is no suggestion that the record sent up from the superior court is incomplete or erroneous, defendant’s motions predicated on OCGA § 5-6-48 (d) are denied.

Decided October 8, 1992

Joseph W. Newton, *pro se.*

*Robert E. Wilson, District Attorney, Edward E. Carter,*for appellee.

*Appeal dismissed.*

*Sognier, C. J., and Andrews, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000             SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           9,210                       0
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   91,165                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,634                       0
<INVENTORY>                                     20,938                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               123,738                       0
<PP&E>                                          44,940                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 283,029                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          263,444                       0
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                            16                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,958                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   283,029                       0
<SALES>                                        657,371                 165,425
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               657,371                 165,425
<CGS>                                          497,955                 126,598
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  661,125                 181,616
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               166,775                 156,620
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (3,124)                     549
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (14,664)                 (5,159)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (187,282)               (177,022)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,358)                   (916)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (185,933)               (176,092)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (185,933)               (176,092)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (11.30)                 (10.69)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (11.30)                 (10.69)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

                            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 Annual Report of American Physicians Capital, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Frank H. Freund Chief Financial 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) 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/ Frank H. Freund
----------------------------
Frank H. Freund
Chief Financial Officer
March 28, 2003
EXHIBIT 31.1CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES—OXLEY ACT OF 2002     I, John C. Corey certify that:(1) I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Stoneridge, Inc. (the “Company”); (2) Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; (3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; (4) The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a — 15(f)and 15d — 15(f)) for the Company and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and(5) The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the Company’s board of directors: (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe Company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.     /s/ John C. Corey         John C. Corey, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director    December 21, 2007
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION






<PAGE>
                                  Exhibit 32.1

                     CERTIFICATION OF DISCLOSURE 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 Annual  Report of 30DC,  Inc.  (the  "Company") on Form
10-K/A for the period  ending  June 30,  2013 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I, Edward Dale,  Principal
Executive  Officer,  President,  and Chief  Executive  Officer  of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 USC section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.

Dated: April 4, 2014

/s/ Edward Dale
-----------------------------------------------------
Edward Dale,
Principal Executive Officer, and President

This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Juan Gonzalez, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), rendered April 21, 1986, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and unlawful possession of marihuana, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The evidence that the defendant was the individual who sold heroin to undercover Police Officer Forte was clear and strong. Forte had an opportunity to view the defendant from a close distance for approximately two minutes during the sale, and identified him approximately five minutes thereafter when he was arrested. There were no significant gaps or *124inconsistencies in her testimony. Accordingly, the evidence established the defendant’s guilt of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree beyond a reasonable doubt and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Chang,*129 AD2d 722).

Most of the defendant’s claims of prosecutorial misconduct were not raised at trial, and consequently are unpreserved for appellate review *(see, People v Dordal,*55 NY2d 954, 956, *rearg dismissed*61 NY2d 759; *People v Chang, supra).*Other than those few remarks by the prosecutor to which the trial court sustained the defendant’s objections, the remainder of the prosecutor’s summation constituted either fair comment on the evidence or a fair response to the defense summation *(see, People v Reichbach,*131 AD2d 515; *People v Seldon,*128 AD2d 742). Moreover, the defendant was not prejudiced by any of the prosecutor’s statements *(see, People v Galloway,*54 NY2d 396, 401; *People v Roopchand,*107 AD2d 35, 36, *affd*65 NY2d 837). Thompson, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.
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


Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of
      Eastern Environment Solutions, Corp. (the "Company"), for the purposes of 18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:





(1)  The
      Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December
      31, 2006 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.





Dated:
      March 30 , 2007





/s/
      Yun
      Wang


Yun
      Wang


Chief
      Executive Officer





/s/
      Jianhua Sun


Jianhua
      Sun


Chief
      Financial Officer




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Eastern Environment Solutions, Corp. and will be retained by Eastern Environment
      Solutions, Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
      its
      staff upon request.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

CORY BARRANT SIVIK,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-3592

[May 9, 2019]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; John S. Kastrenakes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2015-CF000255-AXXX-MB.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Stacey Kime, Assistant Public 

Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Allan R. Geesey, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., CONNER, J., and METZGER, ELIZABETH A., Associate Judge, 

concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, John C. Doyle, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(i) the Annual Report of Renovis, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods covered by the Annual Report.

In Witness Whereof,
the undersigned have set his hands hereto as of the 13thday of March, 2006.



By:

/s/    John C.
DoyleName: John C. DoyleTitle: Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer


Dated: March 13, 2006

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates to, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by references into any filings of Renovis, Inc. under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
#### Finnegan, Respondent, v. Finnegan, Appellant.

*(Supreme Court, General Term, Fourth Department.*

May 2, 1890.)

No opinion. Judgment and order reversed on the exceptions, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event.
Exhibit 10.2


 


Golub Capital Direct Lending Corporation


200 Park Avenue, 25th Floor


New York, New York 10166


 


		Re:	Investment Advisory Agreement between Golub Capital Direct Lending Corporation and GC Advisors LLC



 


This waiver letter agreement
(this “Waiver Letter”) to the Investment Advisory Agreement, dated as of July 1, 2021 (the “Agreement”),
by and between Golub Capital Direct Lending Corporation, a Maryland corporation (the “Corporation”), and GC Advisors
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Adviser”), is made this 1st day of July 2021.


 


The Adviser hereby agrees
to waive any reimbursement by the Corporation for any expenses the Adviser incurs on the Corporation’s behalf in connection with
the Corporation’s formation and closing of the first offering of shares of the common stock of the Corporation in an aggregate amount
in excess of seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000).


 


Unless otherwise indicated,
capitalized terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.


 


For the period ending on July
1, 2022, the Adviser hereby agrees to waive 50% of the Base Management Fee, calculated in accordance with the Agreement. Except as expressly
amended hereby, the Agreement remains in full force and effect.


 


No waiver of any provision
of this Waiver Letter, nor consent to any departure by either party therefrom, shall in any event be effective unless the same shall be
in writing and signed by a duly authorized officer of the party to be charged with the waiver or consent, and then such waiver or consent
shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given.


 


This Waiver Letter and the
Agreement contain the entire agreement of the parties and supersede all prior agreements, understandings and arrangements with respect
to the subject matter hereof and thereof. This Waiver Letter shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York and
the applicable provisions of the Investment Company Act. To the extent the applicable laws of the State of New York, or any of the provisions
herein, conflict with the provisions of the Investment Company Act, the latter shall control.


 


This Waiver Letter may be
executed in any number of counterparts, any one of which need not contain the signatures of more than one party, but all of such counterparts
together shall constitute one agreement.


 


[Remainder of Page Intentionally Blank]


 






     


     


    

 


	 	Very
    truly yours,
	 	
	 	GC ADVISORS LLC
	 	 
	 	By:	 
	 	Name:	David
    B. Golub
	 	Title:	President



 


	ACKNOWLEDGED
    AND AGREED:	 
		 
	GOLUB
    CAPITAL DIRECT LENDING CORPORATION	 
		 
	By:	 	 
	Name:	David
    B. Golub	 
	Title:	President
    and Chief Executive Officer	 




   






    A-1
Exhibit 31.2I, Christopher Dunn, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Covad Communications Group, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly reportis being prepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparationof financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.      **COVAD COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC.**
#### JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ALTITUDE CAPITAL PARTNERS, L.P. and Security Research Holdings, LLC, Defendants-Appellees. Juniper Networks, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Altitude Capital Partners, L.P. and Security Research Holdings, LLC, Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 2011-1418, 2011-1468.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Sept. 1, 2011.

Andrew T. Oliver, Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, Palo Alto, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Alan J. Heinrich, Irell & Manella LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Altitude Capital Partners, L.P. and Security Research Holdings, LLC move without opposition to withdraw their cross-appeal no. 2011-1468.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion to withdraw 2011-1468 is granted. The appeal is dismissed.

*990(2) Each side shall bear its own costs in 2011-1468.

(3) The revised official caption for 2011-1418 is reflected above.

(4) The stay of the briefing schedule is lifted. Juniper Network, Inc.’s opening brief in 2011-1418 is due within 21 days of the date of filing of this order.