alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-91,518-01

EX PARTE ANWAR LAMMON HOLMES, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 17852-A IN THE 115 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM UPSHUR COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and sentenced to eighty

years’ imprisonment. The Twelfth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Holmes v. State, No.

12-18-00359-CR (Tex. App.—Tyler Oct. 30, 2019) (not designated for publication). Applicant filed

this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the district clerk

forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends, among other things, that trial counsel was ineffective because he did not

object to improper juryargument. Applicant has alleged facts that, if true, might entitle him to relief. 

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Accordingly, the record should be developed. The

trial court is the appropriate forum for findings of fact. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07, § 3(d). 
2

The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s claim. In developing the record,

the trial court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). If the trial court elects to hold a

hearing, it shall determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wants to be

represented by counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent him at the hearing. See TEX.

CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 26.04. If counsel is appointed or retained, the trial court shall immediately

notify this Court of counsel’s name.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law as to whethertrial counsel’s

performance was deficient and Applicant was prejudiced. The trial court may make any other

findings and conclusions that it deems appropriate in response to Applicant’s claim.

The trial court shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law within ninety days from

the date of this order. The district clerk shall then immediately forward to this Court the trial court’s

findings and conclusions and the record developed on remand, including, among other things,

affidavits, motions, objections, proposed findings and conclusions, orders, and transcripts from

hearings and depositions. See TEX.R.APP.P. 73.4(b)(4). Any extensions of time must be requested

by the trial court and obtained from this Court.

Filed: October 7, 2020

Do not publish
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
        This schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted from
        Electric  Lightwave,  Inc.'s Consolidated  Financial  Statements for the
        period  ended  September  30, 1999 and is  qualified  in its entirety by
        reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                        0001044827
<NAME>                       Electric Lightwave, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     US Dollars

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         24,216
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  32,431
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               60,178
<PP&E>                                         723,141
<DEPRECIATION>                                 65,212
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 726,982
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,027
<BONDS>                                        560,574
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       500
<OTHER-SE>                                     51,512
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   726,982
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               132,913
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  63,645
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               29,399
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             24,271
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (97,584)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   947
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (98,531)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (98,531)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (1.98)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (1.98)



</TABLE>
#### SMITH, Respondent, v. MILLIKEN et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Fifth Department.

March 27, 1894.)

Action by John J. Smith against Nathan J. Milliken and Charles F. Milliken.

Argued before DWIGHT, P. J., and LEWIS, HAIGHT, and BRADLEY, JJ.

No opinion. Interlocutory judgment appealed from affirmed, with costs, with leave to the defendants to withdraw demurrer, and answer over within 20 days, on payment of the costs of this appeal and of the demurrer.
<PAGE>



                                  EXHIBIT 32.a
================================================================================

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Morgan Beaumont, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Clifford Wildes, in my capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

                  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

                  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.



                                                    /S/ CLIFFORD WILDES
                                                    -----------------------

           Date: December 23, 2005                  Clifford Wildes
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Vincent Crawford, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.), rendered November 26, 1986.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed (see, *People v Pellegrino,*60 NY2d 636; *People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Rubin, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 20996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10395]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary


Notice of Interest Rate on Overdue Debts

    Section 30.13 of the Department of Health and Human Services' 
claims collection regulations (45 CFR part 30) provides that the 
Secretary shall charge an annual rate of interest as fixed by the 
Secretary of the Treasury after taking into consideration private 
consumer rates of interest prevailing on the date that HHS becomes 
entitled to recovery. The rate generally cannot be lower than the 
Department of Treasury's current value of funds rate or the applicable 
rate determined from the ``Schedule of Certified Interest Rates with 
Range of Maturities.'' This rate may be revised quarterly by the 
Secretary of the Treasury and shall be published quarterly by the 
Department of Health and Human Services in the Federal Register.
    The Secretary of the Treasury has certified a rate of 13\3/4\% for 
the quarter ended March 31, 2001. This interest rate will remain in 
effect until such time as the Secretary of the Treasury notifies HHS of 
any change.

    Dated: April 20, 2001.
George Strader,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Finance.
[FR Doc. 01-10395 Filed 4-25-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-04-M
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6340 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6340

   To amend the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to modify the 
threshold rates of unemployment that must be met by a State in order to 
     establish eligibility for fourth-tier emergency unemployment 
                compensation with respect to such State.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 29, 2010

 Mr. Hinchey introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 to modify the 
threshold rates of unemployment that must be met by a State in order to 
     establish eligibility for fourth-tier emergency unemployment 
                compensation with respect to such State.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Fairness in Unemployment Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 4002(e)(2) of the Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2008 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``6'' and inserting 
        ``4''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``8.5'' and inserting 
        ``7.0''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to individuals exhausting third-tier emergency unemployment 
compensation on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.25
Executive Compensation Notification
Chief Financial Officer




Fiscal 2020 Compensation Program of Chief Financial Officer


Fiscal 2020 Base Salary and Other Compensation: The table below sets forth the fiscal 2020 base salary and bonus for Mr. Wheat.


	
							
	 
	 
	 
	 
	Annual Base Salary
	 
	Discretionary Bonus

	Name 
	 
	Office 
	 
	Fiscal 2020
	 
	Fiscal 2020

	Bill W. Wheat
	 
	Executive Vice President and CFO
	 
	$500,000
	 
	See Below






Discretionary Bonus and Other Long-Term Benefits:  The Board of Directors may award discretionary bonuses to Mr. Wheat based on his performance in fiscal 2020. In addition, Mr. Wheat may participate in two separate deferred compensation plans. The first plan allows the executive to make voluntary income deferrals. The second plan is a promise by the Company to pay benefits to the executive. If the executive is employed by the Company on the last day of the fiscal year (for example September 30, 2020), then the Company will establish a liability equal to 10% of his annual base salary as of the first day of the fiscal year (for example October 1, 2019). This liability will accrue earnings in future years at a rate established by the administrative committee.


Performance Restricted Stock Units: On November 6, 2019, the Compensation Committee approved an award of performance restricted stock units (“Performance RSUs”) pursuant to the Company's 2006 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended and restated ("2006 Plan"), to Mr. Wheat in the following amount:
	
					
	Name 
	 
	Office 
	 
	Target Number of Performance
Restricted Stock Units

	Bill W. Wheat
	 
	Executive Vice President and CFO
	 
	30,000






The Performance RSUs relate to a three-year performance period beginning on October 1, 2019 and ending on September 30, 2022 (the “2022 Performance Period”). The Performance RSUs will vest if four performance goals are satisfied. The four performance goals are relative total shareholder return (“TSR”), relative return on investment (“ROI”), relative selling, general and administrative expense containment (“SG&A”) and relative gross profit (“GP”) (collectively, the “Performance Goals”). Each Performance Goal is weighted twenty-five percent (25%) of the target number of Performance RSUs. The target number of Performance RSUs may be increased to a maximum number of 60,000 for Mr. Wheat upon maximum achievement of each of the four Performance Goals and decreased to a minimum number of zero upon minimum achievement of each of the four Performance Goals based on relative performance to the Company's peer group or the S&P 500 Index TSR, as applicable.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Corporate Fraud Accountability Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted), Dr. Stephen A. Levine, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Allergy Research Group, Inc.
(the "Company"), hereby certifies that, to the best of their knowledge:

         The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
September 30, 2002, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.1
(the "Periodic Report"), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of
this 13th day of November 2002.



                                            /s/ Stephen A. Levine
                                            ---------------------
                                            Dr. Stephen A. Levine, Ph.D.
                                            CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
                                            FINANCIAL OFFICER
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, Clifford K. Bown, certify, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for VASCO Data Security International, Inc. for the quarter ended
on June 30, 2011, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ Clifford K. Bown        
|                            
|Clifford K. Bown            
|Executive Vice President and
|Chief Financial Officer     
|August 5, 2011
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

June 2, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 002 38

- C R

IN RE Roy L. SMITHWICK, Jr.

ORDER

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez , Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez , Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

The court has considered the Motion for Reconsideration En Banc filed by relator on

May 16, 2016 and the motion is DENIED.

It is so ORDERED on June 2, 2016

.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

co urt on this 2nd day of June, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle , Clerk
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
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 on Form 10-Q of GameTech
International, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended July 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Cornelius T. Klerk, Chief Financial 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:  (3)
    
    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(a) or 78o(d)); and(4)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company. /S/ Cornelius T. KlerkCornelius T. KlerkChief Financial Officer
 September 14, 2004
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION * IN THE

OF MARYLAND

* COURT OF APPEALS

v. * OF MARYLAND

* Misc. Docket AG No. 54

September Term, 20 20

SARAH RUTH BARNWELL *

( No. 4842 94

- V, Circuit

* Court f

or Montgomery

County )

ORDER

Upon consider a tion of th e J o int Petition of the Attorney Grievance Commission of

Maryland and Respondent, Sarah Ruth Barnwell

, to suspen d the Respondent from the

practice of law for 60 day s for vio la tions of Rules 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(a) and ( c), 1.16(d),

and 8.4(a) and (d) of the Maryland Attorneys ’ Rules of Pro f essional Conduct and Maryland

Rule 19

- 410

, it is this 3rd day of March

, 202 1

O RDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Mar yland, that effec tive April 2 , 2021

, the

Respondent, Sarah Ruth Barnwell , be suspended from the practice of law for 60 days

, and it

is furt her

ORDERED

, that , effective April 2 , 2021, the Clerk of this Court shall remove the

nam e of Sarah Ruth Bar nwell from the register o f attorneys in th is Court, and certify that fact

to the Trustees of the Client Protection Fund of the Bar of M aryland and all Clerks of all

judicial tribunals in this State in accordance with Maryland R ule 19

- 761

.

/ s / Robert N. McDonald

Senior J udge
**Exhibit 32.2**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.In connection with the Annual Report of Metrocorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the periodending October 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, John R. McEvoy, Jr., Controller and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.            /s/ John R. McEvoy, Jr.         John R. McEvoy, Jr.    Controller and Chief Financial Officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Metrocorp,Inc. and will be retained by Metrocorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.
#### St. Paul’s Realty Corp., Appellant, v Huan Jen Chin et al., Respondents.

—In an action to recover damages for breach of a contract for 4;he sale of real property, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.), dated August 26, 1986, which, *inter alia,*denied its motion to strike the defendants’ affirmative defenses and for summary judgment, and granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court, Queens County, that the memorandum relied upon by the plaintiff does not comply with the Statute of Frauds (General Obligations Law § 5-703 [2]). The memorandum, which included the notation that "[f]urther details will be developed by two parties’ lawyers in 10 days”, clearly indicated an intent to later fix and formalize missing terms and thus renders the memorandum insufficient *(see, Read v Henzel,*67 AD2d 186, 188-189; *Birnhak v Vaccaro,*47 AD2d 915, 916). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Brown and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 08-1690

___________

Donald Felix Winnett, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Saline County Jail; Hugh Gentry, Lt., *

Saline County Jail, originally sued as * Appeal from the United States 

Huge Gentry; Dru Reed, Sgt., Saline * District Court for the

County Jail, originally sued only as * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Reed; Ray Pennington, Sgt., Saline * 

County Jail, originally sued only as * [UNPUBLISHED]

Pennington; Chad Westbrook, Jailer, *

Saline County Jail, originally sued only * 

as Westbrook; Brandon Ford, Jailer, *

Saline County Jail originally sued only *

as Ford; Dan Sutterfield, Detective, *

Arresting Officer; John Doe, Arresting *

Officer, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: March 6, 2009

Filed: March 6, 2009 

___________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.
1

The Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

-2-

In this interlocutory appeal, Arkansas inmate Donald Winnett contests the

district court’s1

 denial without prejudice of his motion for appointment of counsel in

his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit. 

We find no abuse of discretion. See Phillips v. Jasper County Jail, 437 F.3d

791, 794 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review; there is no statutory or constitutional

right to appointed counsel in civil case). The district court’s order reflects

consideration of appropriate factors such as the factual complexity of the issues,

Winnett’s ability to investigate the facts and present his claims, and the complexity

of the legal arguments. See Nelson v. Shuffman, 476 F.3d 635, 636 (8th Cir. 2007)

(per curiam); Phillips, 437 F.3d at 794. Moreover, the denial was without prejudice,

so the court may revisit the decision at a later time if appropriate. We reject Winnett’s

suggestion of judicial bias. See United States v. Dehghani, 550 F.3d 716, 721 (8th

Cir. 2008). 

Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Winnett’s motion on appeal for

appointment of counsel. 

______________________________