alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nathaniel Lee Jones, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The suppression court properly denied defendant’s motion to suppress the sneakers because the evidence at the hearing supports the court’s finding that defendant voluntarily gave them to the police and that he was not in custody at the time. Once the police had information that the sneakers belonged to someone else, they were justified in retaining them.

The court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to sever the several counts of the indictment alleging the commission of rapes and attempted rapes on different dates. Following his capture and arrest at the scene of the last attempted rape, defendant, in a signed statement, confessed to the commission of all of the rapes and attempted rapes. This confession and the events leading up to it were used to *985support each of the counts of the indictment. Applications for severance are addressed to the trial court’s sound discretion *(see,*CPL 200.20 [3]; *People v Lane,*56 NY2d 1, 7; *People v Casiano,*138 AD2d 892, 894, *lv denied*72 NY2d 857). On his motion to sever, defendant did not make a convincing showing of his need to testify as to one count and to remain silent on the others, or that there was substantially more proof on one or more of the offenses and there was a substantial likelihood that the jury would be unable to consider separately the proof as it related to each offense *(see,*CPL 200.20 [3]).

In *People v Jenkins*(50 NY2d 981), the Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to sever counts charging two unrelated robberies of gasoline stations which occurred within three days of each other. In *People v DePass*(35 NY2d 858), it affirmed a conviction of four counts of robbery where the trial court denied defendant’s motion for severance of the four counts and rejected defendant’s contention that the court’s joinder of the four separate counts deprived him of a fair trial. In *People v Casiano (supra),*the court upheld the consolidation of three separate incidents of rape and sodomy occurring three months apart. We reject defendant’s contention that the police unreasonably delayed defendant’s arraignment for the purpose of depriving defendant of his right to counsel. The police were unable to question defendant until he was returned from the hospital at 6:00 a.m. The 6 Vi-hour delay from 6:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., when defendant completed his statement to the police, was reasonable to permit the police to question defendant about the several crimes he allegedly committed. This delay was far short of the 24-hour delay we found to be unreasonable in *People v Cooper*(101 AD2d 1), and far short of the more than 24-hour delay in *People v Mosley*(135 AD2d 662, *lv denied*71 NY2d 1030). (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Wisner, J. — burglary, first degree, and other charges.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Davis, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1





CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER




I, Stephen Squires, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Quantum Materials Corp.;





2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;





3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;





4. The registrant's other certifying officer (if any) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:





a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,  to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance  with generally accepted accounting principles;





c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and





5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the 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 who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.




November 16,  2012

/s/ STEPHEN SQUIRESStephen Squires, Principal Executive Officer
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 15, 2024 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-24-00505-CV 

DOMINION HARBOR ENTERPRISES, LLC, Appellant 

V. 

J. KELLY GRAY, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 134th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-08821 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Pedersen, III 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

Before the Court is appellant’s unopposed May 10, 2024 motion to dismiss 

this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). In the motion, appellant explains that 

the parties have settled their differences and request we dismiss the appeal. We grant 

the motion and dismiss this appeal. 

240505F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

DOMINION HARBOR 

ENTERPRISES, LLC, Appellant 

No. 05-24-00505-CV V. 

J. KELLY GRAY, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 134th Judicial 

District Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. DC-21-08821. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns. Justices Molberg and 

Pedersen, III participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is 

DISMISSED. 

 Subject to any agreement by the parties, it is ORDERED that each party 

bear its own costs of this appeal. 

Judgment entered May 15, 2024
Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 27 Filed 11/28/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 27 Filed 11/28/2007 Page 2 of 2
NOTICE TO CLERK OF COURT: Please accept this Initiating Complaint as an initial pleading 

pursuant to CMO __, dated ____________, of Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein in In Re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

21 MC 102 (AKH) 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

XXXXX, 

 Plaintiff(s), 

 -againstXXXXX, 

 Defendants. 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

 XX Civ. XXXX (AKH) 

INITIATING COMPLAINT

Pursuant to Case Management Order No. __ (“CMO __”) dated June __, 2007 by Hon. 

Alvin K. Hellerstein, U.S.D.J., in In Re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site 

Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH), Plaintiff(s) hereby submit this Initiating Complaint against the 

above named Defendants and state: 

1. Plaintiff ____________ (XXXX) [Å last 4 digits of social security number] 

currently resides at ______________. 

2. Plaintiff(s) have a claim for injury against the Defendants named above that 

would be encompassed within the scope of the In Re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan 

Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

3. Plaintiffs will file a fully complete Check-Off Complaint under this docket 

number within 30 days of the filing of this Initiating Complaint. 

Case 1:07-cv-05354-AKH Document 2-4 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 1 of 2
NOTICE TO CLERK OF COURT: Please accept this Initiating Complaint as an initial pleading 

pursuant to CMO __, dated ____________, of Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein in In Re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

Dated: _____ __, 200X 

{law firm name} 

Attorney(s) for 

Plaintiff(s)_______________________ 

By: ________ 

 {name} 

{law firm address} 

Telephone: _______________ 

Case 1:07-cv-05354-AKH Document 2-4 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:07-cr-00566-GBD Document 15 Filed 07/19/2007 Page 7 of 7
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Johnathan Robert Wimberley

, * From the 90 th District Court

o f Stephens County,

Trial Court No

. F35901

Vs. No. 11

- 21

- 00 100

- CR * February 3

, 20 2 2

The State of Texas

, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(P anel consists of: Bailey , C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J. )

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court ’ s opi nion,

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
Clear All

        30 March 2023    

#                     USFF RESILIENCY SYMPOSIUM OPENING REMARKS                 

                REMARKS AS DELIVERED Thank you, Darren, for the kind introduction.Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today and allowing me to kick off our first-ever Resiliency Symposium.So, let’s start off by seeing who we have here today. Go ahead and raise your hands when I call some of the            

        05 March 2022    

#                     2022 SEABEE BIRTHDAY BALL                  

                Thank you, Lore (RDML Aguayo), for the kind introduction - and let me start off by saying, ‘Happy Birthday’ Seabees! You don’t look a day over 80 years old!             

        07 December 2021    

#                     USFFC Change of Command Final Remarks - ADM Grady                 

                Thanks again Opie. ADM Richard, thank you for stepping in and presiding over today’s ceremony, and I thank you and General Vanherck for honoring us today. I’m truly humbled by your very kind words, your leadership, mentorship, and friendship these last three years.And once again, thanks to everyone            

#####  

##### 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
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer and 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,
      Arne
      Dunhem, certify to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the Annual
      Report on Form 10-KSB of Ariel Way, Inc. for the fiscal year ended September
      30,
      2007 (the “Form 10-KSB”), that the Form 10-KSB fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended, and that information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents,
      in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Ariel Way, Inc. for the periods covered by the Form 10-KSB.





Date: January
                14, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Arne
                DunhemArne
                Dunhem, Chief Executive Officer





I,
      Arne
      Dunhem, certify to the best of my knowledge based upon a review of the Annual
      Report on Form 10-KSB of Ariel Way, Inc. for the fiscal year ended September
      30,
      2007 (the “Form 10-KSB”), that the Form 10-KSB fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
      amended, and that information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents,
      in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      Ariel Way, Inc. for the periods covered by the Form 10-KSB.





Date: January
                14, 2008
            By:
            /s/ Arne
                DunhemArne
                Dunhem, Acting Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
     consolidated balance sheet and consolidated income statement of GATC
     Corporation and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
     financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         14
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  59
<ALLOWANCES>                                   6
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0    <F1>
<PP&E>                                         3609
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1594
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 2828
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0    <F1>
<BONDS>                                        1221 <F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     665
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   2828
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               799
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  341  <F3>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               153  <F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             118
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (76) <F5>
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (21)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (41)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (41)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0

<FN>

<F1> Not applicable because GATC has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2> This value consists of two components: Long-term debt of 1,121 million and
     capital lease obligations of 100 million.  Short-term debt not included in
     this calculation.
<F3> This value represents Operating Expenses on the Consolidated Income 
     Statement.
<F4> This value consists of the Provision for depreciation and amortization on
     the Consolidated Income Statement.
<F5> This value represents (Loss)Income before income taxes and equity in
     earnings of affiliates.
</FN>

        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-05835-WHP Document 5 Filed 06/27/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05835-WHP Document 5 Filed 06/27/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 10.4(b)


       Schedule of Warrant (refinancings after October 31, 2005) Issued by
             NCT Group, Inc. to Carole Salkind on December 22, 2005



                     Expiration                                        Shares
     Grant Date         Date             Exercise Price               Granted
     ----------         ----             --------------               -------
      12/22/05        12/22/10       Greater of:  (i) $0.0039;      34,250,000
                                     or (ii) the par value of
                                     NCT Group, Inc.
                                     common stock on the
                                     date of exercise
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-12-00104- CR

Edw ard Lam oyne King, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F WI LLIAM SO N COUNTY , 26TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 10- 1235 -K 26, H ONO RAB LE B ILLY RAY STUB B LEF IELD, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
A j u ry found appellant Edwar d L amoy ne King g uilty of ag g rava ted assault wit h
a deadly wea

pon. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02(a) (2) (West 2011). After fin d i n g t hat appellant had at l east two previous felony co n v i cti ons, the j ury assessed punishment at t hirty -five y ear s’ imprisonment. See id. § 12.42(d) (West 2011) (enha ncing punishment to life or no less than twenty -five y ear s’ imprisonment for felony conviction wher e defe ndant has previously been convicted of

two sequential fe lonies). Appe l l an t ’s court-a

ppointed attorney has filed a motion to withdraw supported by
a brief concluding that the appea l is frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the require ments of Anders v. Calif

ornia b y p re s en t i ng a profe ssional evalua tion of the rec ord demonstrating why there are no arg uable g rounds to be advanc ed. See Anders v. Calif ornia , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967);G a r

n e r v . S ta te , 3 0 0 S. W. 3 d 7 6 3 , 7 6 6 ( T e x. Cr im
. A p p . 2 0 0 9 ) ; s e e a ls o P e n s o n v . O h io , 4 8 8 U
. S. 7 5 , 86–87 (1988). Appellant rec eived a copy of counsel’s brief and was advised of his rig ht to examine the appellate rec ord an d t o file a pro se brief. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; Garner , 300 S.W .3d at 766. We have not r ece ived a pr o se brief from appe llant. We have conducte d an independe nt rev i ew o f the rec ord, including appellate counsel’s b ri ef, and find no reve rsible err or. See Anders , 386 U.S. at 744; Garner , 300 S.W .3d at 766; Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W .3d 824, 826–27 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). We ag ree with counsel that the re cord pr esents no ar g uably meritorious g rounds for r eview a nd the appe al is frivolous. Counsel’s motion to wit hdrawis g rante d. The judg ment of convic tion is affirmed.

__________________________________________ Scott K. Field, Just ice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Pemberton, and F ield Affir med Filed: Mar ch 6, 2013 Do Not Publish

2
Lovells 

September 19, 2007 

BY: FEDEX 

w E:qo 

Chnki~)~rj, JF 

RICHARD M BE AMAN 

IJSO 1 

Hon. Richard Berman 

United States District Judge 

United States District Court 

for the Southern District of New York 

40 Centre Street 

New York, NY 10007 

Lovells LLP 

590 Madison Avenue 

New York NY 10022 

DOCUMENT 

ELECTRONICALLY FnED 

t t 

ILED: q-z"f-o+ ]j 

Our ref NYMJG2112429513 

Re: Z/M/N'ECRATED SHIPPINCSERY.', LTD. K BELCO RESOMCES, INC ETAL., CASE NO. 

O~-CIV-~~~~(RMB) 

Your Honor: 

We represent Sinochem Jiangsu Corporation ("Sinochem Jiangsu"), one of the 

defendants in the above-captioned case filed by plaintiff Zim Integrated Shipping Services, 

Ltd. ("Zim"). In accordance with Your August 15, 2007 order that Sinochem Jiangsu respond 

to the complaint by October 1, 2007, we intend to file a motion to dismiss the complaint on that 

date.' Pursuant to your individual practices, Sinochem Jiangsu hereby requests a pre-motion 

conference to discuss its proposed motion. 

Although we are continuing to prepare our motion papers, we presently intend to move 

on some or all of the following grounds: (i) Zim's factual allegations do not support the claims; 

(ii) Zim has failed to allege facts implicating Sinochem Jiangsu, and has further failed to plead 

its claims with the requisite specificity; (iii) Zim's factual allegations do not support its 

invocation of the Carriage of Goods at Sea Act; (iv) several of Zim's claims are duplicative of 

' On September 12,2007, after the Court set October 1,2007 as the date by which Sinochem Jiangsu would 

respond to the complaint, Zim filed its First Amended Complaint. 

Lovells LLP is a lim~ted l~ab~llty partnersh~p reg~stered In England and Wales with registered number OC323639 Reg~stered off~ce and princ~pal place of bus~ness 

Atlantlc House. Holborn V~aduct. London EClA 2FG The word 'partner' is used to refer to a member of Lovells LLP or an employee or consultant with equivalent stand~ng 

and qual~f~cations 

Lovells LLP and its affil~ated busmesses have offlces in Al~cante Amsterdam Belling Brussels Ch~cago Duba~ Dusseldorf Frankfurt Hamburg Ho Chi Minh C~ty 

Hong Kong London Madr~d M~lan Moscow Mun~ch New York Paris Prague Rome Shanghai Singapore Tokyo Warsaw Associated offices Budapest Zagreb 

Lawyers(USA1 Sollclrars Rechrsanwalte Avocats Advacaten Notar~ssen Awocat~ Abogados 

Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 19 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 2
Hon. Richard Bennan September 19,2007 

its breach of contract claim; (v) the documents incorporated by reference to the complaint do 

not support Zim's claims; and (vi) the Complaint should be dismissed due to forum non 

conveniens. 

We are generally available to appear for a conference with the Court between now and 

October 1, 2007, with the exception of September 27 and 28 (due to the holidays). 

Respectfully submitted, 

Edward T. Schorr 

cc: Vincent M. DeOrchis, Esq. 

William R. Bennett, 111, Esq. 

Lauren Cozzolino Davies Esq. 

Mr. Robin Du 

Sinotrans Ningbo International 

Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 19 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated March 7, 2002, except for Note 17, as to
which the date is March 28, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedules of The Seibels Bruce Group, Inc., included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001 into the Company's previously filed Registration Statements (Form S-2 File Nos. 333-24081,
333-14123 and 333-14125 and Form S-8 File Nos. 333-65537, 333-14135, 333-15457, 2-70057, 2-83595,
33-34973, 33-43618, 33-43601 and 2-48782).

ARTHUR
ANDERSEN LLP

Columbia,
South Carolina,
March 28, 2002.

---

QuickLinks