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

Docket No. 45922

STATE OF IDAHO ,
Plaintiff

- Respondent ,

v.

ARMANDO GARCIA ,
Defendant

- Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Filed: December 24, 2018
Karel A. Lehrman, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada County. Hon. Nancy Baskin , District Judge.
Order denying Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for correction of an illegal sentence, affirmed

. Eric D. Fredericksen, State Appellate Public Defender; Andrea W. Reynolds
, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.
Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming , Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respond ent.

________________________________________________ Before GRATTON, Chief Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge; and LORELLO, Judge

________________________________________________ PER CURIAM
Armando Garcia pled guilty to trafficking in heroin , Idaho Code § 37

- 2732B(a)(6)(C)

. The district court imposed a unified sentence of thirty years, with a minimum period of confinement of fifteen yea rs

. Garcia filed an Idaho Criminal Rule 35 motion for correction of an illegal sentence, asserting that his sentence is illegal because the determinate term exceeds the mandatory
minimum term. The district court denied Garcia ’s motion, finding that Garcia ’s sentence is not illegal. Garcia appeals.2 In State v. Clements , 148 Idaho 82, 87, 218 P.3d 1143, 1148 (2009), the Idaho Supreme Court held that the term “illegal sentence” under Rule 35 is narrowly interpreted as a sent ence that is illegal from the face of the record, i.e., does not involve significant questions of fact or require an evidentiary hearing. Rule 35 is a “narrow rule,” and because an illegal sentence may be corrected at any time, the authority conferred by Rule 35 should be limited to uphold the finality of judgments. State v. Farwell
, 144 Idaho 732, 735, 170 P.3d 397, 400 (2007). Rule 35 is not a vehicle designed to reexamine the facts underlying the case to determine whether a sentence is illegal; rather , the rule only applies to a narrow category of cases in which the sentence imposes a penalty that is simply not authorized by law or where new evidence tends to show that the original sentence is excessive. Clements , 148 Idaho at 87, 218 P.3d at 1148. I daho
Code Section 19

- 2513 does not require a court to impose a determinate term of exactly the mandatory minimum provided by statute; rather, the court may impose a sentence “of any duration” between the mandatory minimum determinate term and the maximum t erm authorized by statute. State v. Ramsey , 159 Idaho 635, 636

- 37, 364 P.3d 1200, 1201

- 02 (Ct. App. 2015). The record supports the district court’s finding that Garcia ’s sentence is not illegal. Therefore, the district court properly denied Garcia ’s motion. Accordingly, we conclude no
abuse of discretion has been shown and the district court’s order denying Garcia ’s Rule 35
motion is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.2




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 on Form 10-K of WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 9 (the “Partnership”) for the years ended March 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Melanie R. Wenk, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Partnership.








/s/MELANIE R. WENK


Melanie R. Wenk


Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.


Date: April 29, 2011
Exhibit 32.2

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

(as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Kelly L. Groh, as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Genworth Life and Annuity
Insurance Company (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 to my knowledge:



| | (1) | the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008 (the Report), filed with the U. S. Securities and Exchange
Commission, 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 Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: March 2, 2009



|                                                                                             
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    KELLY L. GROH                                                                         
|Kelly L. Groh Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
#### SPELLBOUND DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PACIFIC HANDY CUTTER, INC., and Stanley Black & Decker, Inc., Defendants-Appellants, and Front Line Sales, Inc., Defendant.

Nos. 2012-1573, 2012-1574.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 29, 2013.

William J. Brown, Jr., Brown, Wegner & Berliner, LLP, of Irvine, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief *957was Matthew K. Wegner. Of counsel on the brief was Robert J. Lauson, Lauson & Tarver, LLP, of El Segundo, CA.

Dean A. Dickie, Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C., of Chicago, IL, argued for defendants-appellants. With him on the brief was Ryan C. Williams. Of counsel on the brief was George L. Hampton, IV, HamptonHolley LLP, of Corona Del Mar, CA.

DYK, SCHALL, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is

Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
| 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 consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   By: |   /s/ Eden Ho                                                    |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Name:     |  Eden Ho                                                              |
|  Title:    |  Principal Executive Officer,Principal Financial Officer and Director |
|  Date:     |  March 22, 2010                                                       |
Case 1:07-cv-05804-GEL Document 45-2 Filed 06/07/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05804-GEL Document 45-2 Filed 06/07/2008 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 32


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                         MOUNTAIN STATES HOLDINGS, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB of Mountain States Holdings, Inc. for the year ending December 31,
2003:

     (1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Mountain States Holdings, Inc.


Dated:  March 19, 2004




/s/ Mark E. Massa
Mark E. Massa
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) and
Principal Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Mountain States Holdings, Inc.
and will be retained by Mountain States Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
Case 1:07-cv-04898-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/28/2008 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-04898-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/28/2008 Page 2 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-04898-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/28/2008 Page 3 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-04898-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/28/2008 Page 4 of 5
Case 1:07-cv-04898-AKH Document 3 Filed 08/28/2008 Page 5 of 5
Exhibit 32.1




CEO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350*





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Guaranty Federal Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Shaun A. Burke, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




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








/s/  Shaun A. Burke




Shaun A. Burke


Chief Executive Officer







August 12, 2010
**Exhibit 10.45**

FIRST AMENDMENT AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

WHEREAS, James B. Frownfelter (the “Executive”) hasentered into an employment agreement with Intelsat Holdings, Ltd. (the “Company”) dated as of May 18, 2006 (the “Employment Agreement”); 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto do hereby agree to amend the Employment Agreement, effective as ofMarch 16, 2007, as follows (the “Amendment”): 

1.        CapitalizedTerms.    Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Employment Agreement. 

2.        Base Salary.    The Employment Agreement is amended to add the following two sentences to the end of section 2.1(a): “Effective as of February 19, 2007,Base Salary shall be increased to be $627,000. Increases in Base Salary, as approved by the Compensation Committee from time to time, shall not require written amendment of the Agreement.” 

3.        Governing Law.    This Amendment shall be governed by and construed inaccordance with the laws of the District of Columbia without regard to its conflict of laws principles. 

4.        Successor.    This Amendment shall bind and inure to the benefit of the Company, its successors and assigns, and the Executive and his or her personalrepresentatives and assigns. 

5.        Miscellaneous. 

(a)  This Amendment shall not be construed so as to grant the Executive any right to remain in the employ of the Company or anySubsidiary. 

(b)  This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, which together shall constitute one and thesame original. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be duly executed by its officer thereunder duly authorized andthe Executive has hereunto set his hand, all as of the day and year first set forth above. 

INTELSAT HOLDINGS, LTD.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T M A N U EL T. D EL V I LLA R, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 06- 74729 A ge nc yN o. A 092- 344- 537 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d S e pt e m be r13, 2010 ** B efo re: S IL V E R M A N , C A L L A H A N , an dN . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M anue l T . D e l V i l l ar , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l fr om an im m ig r a tio n ju d g e ’s r e m o v a l o r d e r . W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . 

# FI LED SEP 27 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS06- 74729 2 W e r e v ie w d e n o v o q u e s tio n s o f law an dc o n s titu tio n a l c la im s , Kha n v. H older , 5 8 4 F .3 d7 7 3 , 7 7 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) , an dw e d e n yth e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . D e l V illard o e s n o t c h a lle n g e th e a g e n c y ’s d e te rm in a tio n th a t h e is r e m ovabl e unde r8 U . S . C . § 1227( a ) ( 2) ( A ) ( i i i ) ba s e d on hi s 1992 c onvi c t i on f or le w do rla s c iv io u s a c ts w ith ac h ildu n d e r1 4 y e ar s o f a g e in v io la tio n o f

C a lif o rn ia P e n a l C o d e § 2 8 8 ( a ) . T he agency det erm i ned thatD elV i l l ari s i nel i gi bl e f or re l i ef un der f orm er s e c t i on 212( c ) , 8 U . S . C . § 1182( c ) ( r e pe a l e d 1996) , be c aus e hi s gr ound of r e m o v ab ilityla c k s as ta tu to ryc o u n te rp art in ag r o u n do f in a d m is s ib ility . See 8 C .F .R . § 1 2 1 2 .3 ( f

) ( 5 ) . D e l V illar ’s le g a l an dc o n s titu tio n a l c h a lle n g e s to th is d et erm i n at i o n are fo recl o sedb y A bebe v. Mukasey , 5 5 4 F .3 d1 2 0 3 , 1 2 0 7 , 1 2 0 8 n .7 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) ( e n b an c ) . D e l V i l l ari s i n e l i g i b l e f o raw a i v e ro f

i n a d mi s s i b i l i tyu n d e r8 U . S. C. § 1 18 2(h), because he w as conv i ct ed of an aggravat ed fe l on y a ft erhi s a dm i ss i on as alaw f u l p e rm an e n t r e s id e n t. See A lvarez-B araj as v. G on zales , 418 F . 3d 1050, 10 55 (9th C i r. 20 05 ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

          - 26 CFR Part 1 
          - [REG-125237-00] 
          - RIN 1545-AY60 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Cancellation of notice of public hearing on proposed rulemaking. 

# SUMMARY:

This document cancels the public hearing on proposed regulations relating to the federal income tax treatment of annuity contracts issued by certain insurance companies. 

# DATES:

The public hearing originally scheduled for Wednesday, May 30, 2001, at 10 a.m., is cancelled. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

LaNita Van Dyke of the Regulations Unit, Office of Special Counsel (Modernization & Strategic Planning), (202) 622-7190 (not a toll-free number). 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    A notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing that appeared in the                     **Federal Register**                     on Friday, January 12, 2001 (66 FR 2852), announced that a public hearing was scheduled for Wednesday, May 30, 2001, at 10 a.m., in room 4718, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The subject of the public hearing is proposed regulations under sections 163(e) and 1271 through 1275 of the Internal Revenue Code. The public comment period for these proposed regulations expired on April 12, 2001.                 

The notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing, instructed those interested in testifying at the public hearing to submit a request to speak and an outline of the topics to be addressed. As of Wednesday, May 16, 2001, no one has requested to speak. Therefore, the public hearing scheduled for Wednesday, May 30, 2001, is cancelled. 

LaNita Van Dyke, 

Acting Chief, Regulations Unit, Office of Special Counsel (Modernization & Strategic Planning). 

[FR Doc. 01-12736 Filed 5-22-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Jules Musinger et al., Respondents, v State of New York, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 3.)

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and facts and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the same memorandum as in *Marks v State of New York*([appeal No. 1] 152 AD2d 930). (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims, Corbett, J.— appropriation.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Namal
Nawana, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of Alere Inc.;

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.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                                                
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------
|Date: April 30, 2015 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ Namal Nawana                               
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Namal Nawana                                   
|                     |  |  |  |  |  | Director, President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 10.3








WAIVER OF CERTAIN LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN OPTION AGREEMENTS PERTAINING TO OPTIONS PREVIOUSLY GRANTED UNDER 

THE AMENDED AND RESTATED 2007 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN



Effective August 26, 2010




Reference is made to the stock option agreements (the “Option Agreements”), by and between Dollar General Corporation (the “Company”) and certain employees of the Company pursuant to which such employees were granted, at various times on or subsequent to July 6, 2007 through the date hereof, and currently hold Options to acquire shares of common stock of the Company (“Shares”) in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the Option Agreements and the Dollar General Corporation Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).  Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Option Agreements and the Plan.

The 162(m) Subcommittee of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Committee”) has resolved that effective August 26, 2010, the limitations set forth in Section 4.3(c) of the Option Agreements shall be waived as provided below. 

Section 4.3(c) of the Option Agreements provides that in connection with the exercise of an Option, an Optionee may satisfy his minimum withholding obligation by electing to have the Shares issuable upon exercise of the Option reduced by the number of Shares having an equivalent Fair Market Value to the minimum withholding tax obligation solely in the event the Optionee’s employment terminated without Cause, for Good Reason or due to death or Disability.  

Pursuant to the powers granted to the Committee under the Option Agreement and Plan, the Committee hereby waives the limitations set forth in Section 4.3(c) of the Option Agreements and provides that effective August 26, 2010, in connection with the exercise of an Option, an Optionee, who is an employee of the Company at the time of such exercise, may satisfy the minimum tax withholding by electing to have the Shares issuable upon any exercise of any Option outstanding under the Option Agreements, reduced by the number of Shares having an equivalent Fair Market Value to the minimum withholding tax obligation in connection with the exercise of such Option, or any portion thereof.
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

September 22, 2022

No. 04

- 22

- 00487

- CR

EX PARTE Rogelio Contreras SORIANO

From the County Court
, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10435CR Honorable Dennis Powell , Judge Presi ding



### O R D E R

A ppellant’s brief i s due on September 28
, 2022. Before t he due date, Appellant filed a first motion for a sixty

- day extension of time to file the brief

. Appellant’s motion is granted

. Appellant’s brief is due on Novem ber 28 , 2022

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38. 6( d ). Any further motion for an extension of time to file the brief may be disfavored.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the se al of the said court on this 22nd day of September, 2022

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ
, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 31.1

In connection with the Report of CalbaTech, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, James DeOlden, CEO, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act, that:

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

(2)  The Information contained in the Report fairly represents,
in all material aspects, the financial condition and result of
operations on the Company.


By: /s/  James DeOlden
James DeOlden, CEO