alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Larry Davis, Also Known as David Lamar Watson, Also Known as Tony Berry, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lakritz, J.), rendered January 24, 1986, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree and resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel is based on his attorney’s withdrawal of a *Mapp*suppression motion. However, the facts presented revealed that the defendant had discarded his weapon and no search had occurred. Counsel’s withdrawal of that motion upon such disclosure was consistent with accepted standards of meaningful criminal defense representation considering the evidence, the law and the particular circumstances *(see, People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 146-147; *People v Wagner,*104 AD2d 457).

*778Counsel appropriately concluded that the police acted properly in arresting the defendant, based upon the radio call for police assistance, the defendant’s presence at the scene, his flight as the arresting officers arrived, the pursuit of the defendant, and the discarding of the weapon during the chase *(see, People v Leung,*68 NY2d 734; *People v De Bour,*40 NY2d 210).

Furthermore, defense counsel’s performance of his duties regarding pretrial suppression procedures, extensive cross-examination of prosecution witnesses and his objections to improper offers of evidence met the standard of meaningful representation *(see, People v Brown,*124 AD2d 667, *lv denied*69 NY2d 825; *People v Hill,*122 AD2d 810, *lv denied*68 NY2d 914).

Finally, it was not improper for the trial court to sentence the defendant to consecutive terms considering his prior criminal history (CPL 470.15 [3]; *People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302; *People v Smith,*99 AD2d 472). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Harwood, JJ., concur.
Clear All

        24 March 2023    

                    Navy partners with Army to build a landing beach in Virginia                 
                The Army and Navy got together on March 21 and 22 for a Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore (JLOTS) tactical exercise at Fort Story that provided some key training opportunities.             

        01 February 2012    

                    Bataan Amphibious Ready Group Returns from Deployment                 
                Nearly 2,000 Sailors aboard the ships of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group (BATARG) are scheduled to return to their homeports Tuesday, Feb. 7 following a 10 1/2-month deployment supporting operations in the U.S. Navy's 5th and 6th Fleets areas of responsibility            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
<PAGE>
                                                                 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 Annual Report of Robotic Vision Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
Pat V. Costa, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Jeffrey P.
Lucas, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, each 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 his knowledge:

(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.



                                                     /s/ Pat V. Costa
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Pat V. Costa
                                                     Chairman, President, CEO


                                                     /s/ Jeffrey P. Lucas
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Jeffrey P. Lucas
                                                     Chief Financial Officer

January 13, 2004
# C_2009238EN.01000601.xml

| 3.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 238/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 238/6

---

Notice of Implementation of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (2007-2013)

SME Guarantee Facility (SMEG) and High Growth and Innovative SME Facility (GIF)

List of Participating Countries

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 238/05

Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, United Kingdom

European Economic Area (EEA) countries: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway

Candidate countries: Croatia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey

Countries of the Western Balkans: Montenegro, Serbia

(Reference: Notice 2007/C 226/02 published in
  Official Journal of the European Union C 226, 26.9.2007, page 2 and notice 2007/C 302/09 published in
  Official Journal of the European Union C 302, 14.12.2007, page 8)

Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

---
Exhibit (10)(a)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

  

  

  

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in
    Post-Effective Amendment No. 42 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-145531) and Amendment No. 516 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-09763), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) April 1, 2019, with
    respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York and (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln New York Account N For Variable Annuities for the registration of interests in a separate
    account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

  

  

  

  

  /s/Ernst & Young

  

  

  

  

  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  December 20, 2019
Clear All

        06 January 2021    

                    Benefits of Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine                 
                The nation and the Department of Defense are beginning to administer vaccines for the SARS-CoV-2 virus. These vaccines, which are currently voluntary, are a proven effective measure to better protect our Navy and our nation from this insidious threat. While the vaccine isn't mandatory for service            

        23 December 2020    

                    Naval Aviation and Aircraft Carrier Medical Staffs to Receive First Dosage of the COVID-19 Vaccination                 
                Medical personnel from a variety of Commander, Naval Air Force Atlantic (CNAL) commands will receive the first coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccinations at Naval Medical Center Portsmouth (NMCP) Immunization Clinic, in Portsmouth, and at Navy Branch Health Clinic, Naval Air Station, Jacksonville, Florida            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
# CE2011236EN.01017501.xml

| 12.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 236/175 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 236/175

---

Wednesday 16 June 2010Joint Baltic Sea Research and Development Programme (Bonus-169) ***I

P7_TA(2010)0212

European Parliament legislative resolution of 16 June 2010 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on participation by the Community in a Joint Baltic Sea Research and Development Programme (Bonus-169) undertaken by several Member States (COM(2009)0610 – C7-0263/2009 – 2009/0169(COD))

2011/C 236 E/38

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2009)0610),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Articles 169 and 172(2) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C7-0263/2009),

having regard to the Commission Communication to Parliament and the Council entitled ‘Consequences of the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for ongoing interinstitutional decision-making procedures’ (COM(2009)0665),

having regard to Article 294(3) and Articles 185 and 188(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 29 April 2010 (1),

1

having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy and the opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A7-0164/2010),

| 1. | Adopts the position at first reading hereinafter set out; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Adopts the position at first reading hereinafter set out;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

---

(1)  Not yet published in the Official Journal.

1

---

Wednesday 16 June 2010P7_TC1-COD(2009)0169

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 16 June 2010 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2010/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on the participation of the Union in a Joint Baltic Sea Research and Development programme (BONUS) undertaken by several Member States

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 862/2010/EU)

---
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-01670-AKH Document 24 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 8 of 8
#### CADENCE BANK NA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HORRY PROPERTIES, LLC, a South Carolina Limited Liability Company; M & M Builders, LLC of OD, a South Carolina Limited Liability Company; Arthur F. McLean, Jr., Defendants-Appellants, and Beach First National Bank; Horry County State Bank, Defendants.

No. 12-2008.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 25, 2013.

Decided: April 30, 2013.

*200Louis D. Nettles, Folkens Law Firm P.A., Florence, South Carolina, for Appellants. J. Thomas McBratney, III, McBratney Law Firm, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Horry Properties, LLC, M & M Builders, LLC of OD, and Arthur F. McLean, Jr., appeal the district court’s orders setting aside transfers of certain real property and associated leases as fraudulent conveyances and denying their motion to alter or amend the judgment. We have reviewed the district court’s thorough opinions, as well as the parties’ briefs and the record included on appeal, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Cadence Bank NA v. Horry Prop., LLC,*4:10-cv-02717-RBH (D.S.C. April 3, 2012; July 17, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
                     
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   Sep-30-1997
<CASH>                                         19,445
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  152,499
<ALLOWANCES>                                   3,581
<INVENTORY>                                    10,665
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               183,372
<PP&E>                                         2,034,517
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,137,431
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 1,175,730
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          271,357
<BONDS>                                        198,766
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       72,530
<OTHER-SE>                                     467,126
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   1,175,730
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               631,247
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  350,254
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             16,717
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                154,223
<INCOME-TAX>                                   57,321
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            96,902
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   96,902
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.00
        


</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-05366-AKH Document 39 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05366-AKH Document 39 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05728-RJS-DCF Document 9 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 1 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05728-RJS-DCF Document 9 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 2 of 3Case 1:07-cv-05728-RJS-DCF Document 9 Filed 12/13/2007 Page 3 of 3
**EXHIBIT23.1**

**Consentof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

Image Entertainment, Inc.Chatsworth, California

We hereby consentto the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3(No. 333-121912 and No. 333-128487), RegistrationStatement on Form S-4 (No. 333-128535) and RegistrationStatements on Form S-8 (No. 33-43241, No. 33-55393and No. 33-57336) of Image Entertainment, Inc. of our reportdated June 27, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements andschedule for the year ended March 31, 2006, which appears in this AnnualReport on Form 10-K.

/s/ BDO SEIDMANLLP

Los Angeles, California

June 27, 2005

 

----
Exhibit 4.34

 

Rights and Obligations Assumption Letter

 

This entity, Guangzhou Huihua Education Consulting Co., Ltd., is the subsidiary of BGY Education Investment Management Co., Ltd. (“Investor”) registered in Guangzhou City at Panyu District branch office of the Administration for Market Regulation on July 4, 2019. The Investor holds 100% of the interests in this entity.

 

In accordance with the Exclusive Management Service and Business Cooperation Agreement (“Agreement”) entered into by and between Investor, Zhuhai Hengqin Bright Scholar Management Consulting Co., Ltd. and other relevant parties on January 25, 2017, this entity shall join the Agreement according to Article 10.1 of the Agreement as a “New Subsidiary of Party B” under the Agreement.

 

This entity hereby agrees to join the Agreement as a new Subsidiary of Party B of the Investor, enjoy the rights under the Agreement, and perform the obligations according to the Agreement. This Assumption Letter came into effect upon the date of execution.

 

Guangzhou Huihua Education Consulting Co., Ltd.

(Seal) Guangzhou Huihua Education Consulting Co., Ltd. Affixed

 

	
By:
    	
/s/Feihu Song
    	
 
    
	
Name:
    	
Feihu Song
    	
 
    
	
Title:
    	
Legal Representative
    	
 
    
	
Date:
    	
December 12,   2019
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*JAMES W.

*William F. Gallagher,*in support of the petition.

*Joseph T. Corradino,*senior assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 12, 2005

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 87 Conn. App. 494 (AC 24396), is denied.
Exhibit 32

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 filing of the
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the Report)
by Scanner Technologies Corporation (Registrant), I, Elwin M. Beaty, the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of 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 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.

|      
|------
|      
|      
|Dated:
|      

---
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 23, 2009 

s0615 

Order 

 

June 23, 2009 

138569 

DAVID B. FRIED, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 138569 

 COA: 288629 

Ingham CC: 08-001078-AV 

PAULA C. REEVES, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 18, 2009 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Bruce E. Lilling, Esq. BL-1124 

55 Church Street 

White Plains, NY 10601 

Tel: (914) 684-0600 

Fax: (914) 684-0304 

Attorney for Velez Capital Management, LLC and Oliver Velez 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT NEW YORK 

 

 : 

 PRISTINE CAPITAL HOLDINGS INC., : 

 : 

Plaintiff, : NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

 v. : Civil Action No.: 07-cv-5720 

 : 

 VELEZ CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, : 

 OLIVER VELEZ, PAUL LANGE, SAUL : 

 ORTIZ-STEVENS, AND STEPHEN CINA : 

 : 

 Defendants. : 

 : 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the individual attorney Bruce E. Lilling and the firm of 

Lilling & Lilling, PLLC hereby appear as trial counsel for Defendants Velez Capital 

Management LLC and Oliver Velez. 

Dated: June 19, 2007 Respectfully submitted 

 Velez Capital Management LLC 

 and Oliver Velez 

 By its attorney 

 _s/Bruce E. Lilling___________ 

 Bruce E. Lilling, Esq. 

Lilling & Lilling, PLLC. 

55 Church Street, suite 207 

White Plains, New York 10601 

Ph 914 684 0600 

Fx 914 684 0304 

Bruce@Lilling.com

Case 1:07-cv-05720-WHP Document 3 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-05724-PAC Document 4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05724-PAC Document 4 Filed 06/20/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joey Bell, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Ain, J.), rendered March 18, 1985, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Prior to jury selection, the defendant’s counsel requested a *701"precharge” indicating that if the defendant chose not to testify, no unfavorable inference could be drawn against him. Although the trial court granted this request, no such language was included in the court’s preliminary instructions to the jury. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court’s failure to give the no inference charge in its preliminary instructions constitutes reversible error. We disagree.

With respect to preliminary instructions to the jury, the trial court is not mandated to give a no inference charge upon request of the defendant *(see,*CPL 270.40). Further, while the trial court agreed to give a no inference charge, its subsequent failure to do so must be viewed as inadvertent. As noted by the Court of Appeals, "[w]hen a Judge grants a request to charge and then fails to deliver the charge as requested, the requesting party has an obligation to draw the error to the Judge’s attention” *(People v Whalen,*59 NY2d 273, 280). Therefore, by failing to draw to the trial court’s attention the inadvertent omission of the requested no inference charge, the "defendant must be deemed to have waived” any objection to the failure to so charge the jurors *(People v Whalen, supra,*at 280). While the defendant did not testify at the trial, he did not request that a no inference charge be given by the trial court in its final instructions to the jury. Accordingly, there was no violation of the statutory requirements set forth in CPL 300.10 (2).

In addition, we find that the statements made by the prosecutor during his summation which are challenged by the defendant either elicited objections which were sustained and no further curative instructions were requested, or were proper responses to the defense summation *(see, People v Corley,*140 AD2d 536; *People v Street,*124 AD2d 841; *People v Freeman,*123 AD2d 784), fair comment on the evidence *(see, People v Ayala,*120 AD2d 600; *People v Allen,*99 AD2d 592, *affd*64 NY2d 979), or unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]) and do not warrant reversal in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

Any issue of law with respect to the defendant’s remaining contention was not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05 [2]), and, in any event, does not require reversal in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Bracken, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.