alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# STATEOFLOUISIANA



# COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS RODNEY L. WHITE NO. 

### 2022 KW 0057


### APRIL 13, 2022

In Re: 

## Rodney L. White, 

### applying for 

### supervisory writs, 

### 19th



### Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton 

### Rouge, No. 

### 02-99-0127.

BEFORE: McCLENDON, WELCH, AND HOLDRIDGE, JJ.

WRIT DENIED ON THE SHOWING MADE. 

### Relator failed to include 

## a copy of the " Motion 

### to annul and/or Quash Nunc Pro Tunc, " the 

### district court' s 

### ruling on the motion, the 

### indictment, the commitment order, all pertinent transcripts and/or minute entries, and 

### any other portions of the 

### district court record that might support the claims raised 

### in the application 

### for postconviction relief. 

### Supplementation of this writ application 

## and/oranapplication forrehearingwill notbe considered. See 

### Uniform Rules of Louisiana Courts of Appeal, Rules 2-18.7 & 4- 9. 

## Any future 

## filing on this 

### issue should 

### include the entire contents of this application, 

## themissing itemsnotedabove, and a 

### copy of this 

### ruling. In the event relator elects to 

### file a new application with this court, 

### the application must 

### be filed 

### on or before June 7, 2022.

Moreover, as an 

### indigent inmate, relator 

### is entitled to receive certain court 

### documents, such as 

### his guilty plea 

### transcript, the 

### bill of 

### information or 

### indictment, commitment papers, court minutes 

### for various portions of the trial, and minutes of 

### his 

### sentencing, free of 

## charge without the necessity of 

### establishing a particularized need. See State ex rel. 

### Simmons v. State, 

### 93-0275 ( La. 

### 12/16/94), 647 So.2d 1094 ( per curiam). For all other 

### documents, the 

### inmate is required to establish a " particularized need" 

## by properly 

## filing an application 

### for postconviction relief, which sets out specific claims of constitutional errors 

### requiring the requested 

### documentation 

### for support. 

### See State ex rel. 

### Bernard v. 

### Criminal District Court Section " J", 

### 94-2247 ( La. 

### 4/28/95), 

### 653 So.2d 1174, 

### 1175 ( per curiam); 

### State ex rel. McKnight v. 

### State, 

### 98-2258 ( La. 

## App. 1st Cir. 

### 12/3/ 98), 742 So.2d 

### 894, 895 ( per curiam) . 

### PMc JEW 

### Holdridge, 

### J., concurs and would 

## deny the writ application.
COURT OF APPEAL, 

### FIRST CIRCUIT

EPUTY CILERk OF COURT

FOR THE COURT
No. 44.

#### Ornstein et al. *v.*Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co.

Jurisdictional statement submitted October 12, 1931.

Decided October 19, 1931.

*Mr. Stuart R. Bolin*for appellants.

*Mr. Fred C. Rector*for appellee.

*Per Curiam:*

The appeal herein is dismissed for the want of jurisdiction. *Grays Harbor Logging Co.*v. *Coats-Fordney Logging Co.,*243 U. S. 251,

255-257.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Preston Cornelius EVERETT, a/k/a “P”, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-7046.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 19, 2010.

Decided: Oct. 28, 2010.

*834Preston Cornelius Everett, Appellant Pro Se. Sarah E. Roque, Office of the United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Preston Cornelius Everett seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to reconsider the court’s earlier order treating his “Motion to Dismiss Count One of Superseding Indictment” as a successive motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Everett has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of ap-pealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jose Manuel OVALLE-GARCIA, also known as Jose Manual Ova-Garcia, also known as Victor Manuel Lopez, Appellant.

No. 11-2824.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 14, 2012.

Filed: June 1, 2012.

Colin Patrick Johnson, Special, Lisa D. Kirkpatrick, U.S. Attorney’s Office, St. Paul, MN, for Appellee.

Caroline Durham, Assistant, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Appellant.

Before SMITH, ARNOLD, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Jose Ovalle-Garcia appeals from the sentence of 41 months’ imprisonment that the district court1 imposed on him for illegally entering the country after removal. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2). Mr. Ovalle-Garcia contends that, unlike most people who commit his offense, he had not returned to the United States to join family members and in fact intended to return to Guatemala and live there permanently with his wife after earning enough money in the United States to pay her medical bills. He maintains that the unlikelihood that he will re-offend distinguishes his case from the usual one and thus his sentence was unreasonable.

But, as Mr. Ovalle-Garcia concedes, the sentence that he received was at the low end of the guideline range of 41 to 51 months’ imprisonment to which he was subject, and a sentence within the applicable range is presumed reasonable. *United States v. Struzik,*572 F.3d 484, 487 (8th Cir.2009). Here, the district court was cognizant of Mr. Ovalle-Garcia’s argument for a variance from the guideline range, considered it, and specifically rejected it on the record, holding that the relevant facts of the case were of the kind that the guidelines contemplated. The likelihood that a defendant will re-offend is no doubt a proper consideration in fixing a sentence, but the case here is not so strong as to require a finding that it is outside the cases for which the applicable guidelines were designed. We discern no abuse of discretion in rejecting Mr. Ovalle-Garcia’s argument and therefore conclude that the sentence was reasonable.

Affirmed.

1

. The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
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 quarterly report of Flanders Corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, we hereby certify, solely for the
purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my
knowledge:

1.
The quarterly 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 quarterly report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: November
8, 2007

| |                                                            | 
| | ---------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | /s/Robert
 Amerson                                         | 
| |                                                            | 
| | Robert
 Amerson                                            | 
| | Chief
 Executive Officer / (Principal Executive Officer)  
| |                                                            | 
| | /s/Cully
 Bohush                                           | 
| |                                                            | 
| | Cully Bohush                                               | 
| | Chief
 Accounting Officer / (Principal Accounting Officer)

---
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Asia Atlantic
Resources (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended January 31, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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.

|Date: March 14, 2008                           | 
|---------------------------------------------- | 
|                                               | 
|                                               | 
|/s/
      Christopher Murphy                   | 
|Christopher Murphy, President and
      C.E.O. | 
|(Principal Executive Officer)                  | 

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-1146 of The L.L. Knickerbocker Co. Inc. on Form S-8 and in Registration
Statements No. 333-15185 and No. 333-37101 on Form S-3 of our report, dated
March 31, 1998, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the L.L.
Knickerbocker Co., Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1997.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


Costa Mesa, California
March 31, 1998
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 of Centaurus Resources Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending February 28, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert C. Weaver, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted pursuant toss.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

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
2nd day of April, 2009.


/s/ Robert C. Weaver, Jr.
------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of Biotel, Inc.

|                                            |  |                        |  |                  |      |  | 
|------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------- |  | ---------------- | ---- |  | 
|Name                                        |  | State of Incorporation |  | Percentage Owned |     
|                                            |  |                        |  |                  |     
|Braemar, Inc.                               |  | North Carolina         |  |                  | 100% | 
|Agility Centralized Research Services, Inc. |  | Minnesota              |  |                  | 100% | 

---
Exhibit 99.2

(NU-TELECOM LOGO)

FOR RELEASE: Immediate

FROM: New Ulm Telecom, Inc.
27 North Minnesota
New Ulm, Minnesota 56073
Phone 507-354-4111

New Ulm Telecom, Inc. 
Contact: Bill Otis, President and CEO 
507-354-4111
E-mail: billotis@nu-telcom.net

New Ulm Telecom, Inc. Completes
Acquisition of Hutchinson Telephone Company

January 4, 2008

New Ulm Telecom, Inc. (New Ulm) announced today that
it has completed its acquisition of Hutchinson Telephone Company (HTC) for
approximately $78 million. HTC will
continue to operate as a subsidiary of New Ulm. The acquisition has resulted in a combined company that provides
phone, video and internet services with over 50,000 connections in a number of
Minnesota and Iowa communities. New Ulm
funded the purchase from its cash resources and borrowings from Co-Bank, ACB.

New Ulm is excited about the acquisition of
Hutchinson Telephone Company into a new combined company, said Bill Otis,
President and CEO of New Ulm. New Ulm
and HTC are both well-established companies with 100-year histories in South
Central Minnesota. Each company also
has a strong commitment to its community.
We believe the strategic combination of these two companies will enable
us to take advantage of developing industry technologies and continue our
commitment to provide excellent customer service in our communities.

The new combined Company owns and operates incumbent
local exchange carriers (ILECs) and a competitive local exchange carrier (CLEC)
that provide, own and operate phone, video and internet services in a number of
Minnesota and Iowa communities. The
Company also sells and services cellular phones and accessories, customer
premise equipment and provides transport operations. New Ulm also holds a 25.18% investment in FiberComm, LC, a CLEC
based in Sioux City, Iowa, and holds a 33.33% ownership interest in Hector
Communications Corporation, which provides phone, video and internet services
to a number of communities in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Further, the Company has equity interests in
several joint ventures that provide communications services to communities in
Minnesota.

---

Advisors

Williams & Company Communications, Inc. acted as
special financial advisor and Lindquist & Vennum, P.L.L.P. acted as legal
counsel to New Ulm in connection with the transaction.

Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated acted as
financial advisor and Leonard, Street and Deinard, Professional Association
acted as legal counsel to HTC in the transaction.

Forward-Looking Statements

Statements about New Ulms future prospects are forward-looking and,
therefore, involve certain risks and uncertainties. These and other risk factors are discussed in New Ulms Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 and from time to time in its
other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition to these factors,
forward-looking statements in this press release are subject to the ability of
New Ulm to operate the combined company in a profitable manner after the
merger.

---
EXHIBIT 10.8

                              GULF WEST BANKS, INC.
                     EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT BONUS PROGRAM
                          AS AMENDED NOVEMBER 18, 2000

         TERM:

         Continuous with annual review by Board.

         ELIGIBILITY:

         Only Executive Vice Presidents are eligible, however, to receive any
         bonus the officer must be employed by the Bank at the time the bonus is
         paid.

         BONUS CALCULATION:

         Bonus payments will be determined by the percentage increase in BASIC
         EARNINGS PER SHARE (as reported in the Company's Annual 10-K filing
         with the SEC) for the current calendar year over the preceding calendar
         year. The percentage increase in BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE must be 10%
         or more before a bonus will be paid. The amount of the bonus will be a
         percentage of the officer's base salary that is equivalent to 50% of
         the percentage increase in BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE, i.e. an 11.50% in
         BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE will result in a 5.75 % of salary bonus
         payment. The year-to-year increase in earnings will be calculated
         inclusive of accruals for bonus payments.
# CE2011371EN.01004601.xml

| 20.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 371/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 371/46

---

Thursday 7 October 2010Appointment of a Member of the Court of Auditors (Mr Gijs M. de Vries, NL)

P7_TA(2010)0344

European Parliament decision of 7 October 2010 on the nomination of Gijs M. de Vries as a Member of the Court of Auditors (C7-0191/2010 – 2010/0819(NLE))

2011/C 371 E/11

(Consultation)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to Article 286(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C7-0191/2010),

whereas, at its meeting of 27 September 2010, the Committee on Budgetary Control heard the Council’s nominee for membership of the Court of Auditors,

having regard to Rule 108 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A7-0255/2010),

| A. | whereas Gijs M. de Vries fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, |
| --- | --- |

A.

whereas Gijs M. de Vries fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 286(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU,

| 1. | Delivers a favourable opinion on the nomination of Gijs M. de Vries as a Member of the Court of Auditors; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Delivers a favourable opinion on the nomination of Gijs M. de Vries as a Member of the Court of Auditors;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and, for information, the Court of Auditors, the other institutions of the European Union and the audit institutions of the Member States.

---
CERTIFICATIONS  I, Patricia Cooke,
certify that:  1. I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Asia Atlantic Resources;  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(s) 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) 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  (c) 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 (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) 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(s) 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.    Date: September 9,
2010   _/s/
Patricia Cooke_________________ Patricia
Cooke Chief
Executive Officer, President and Director