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

[882 NYS2d 492]

*668Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Wong, J.), rendered June 26, 2008, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court (Mullings, J.), upon a finding that he had violated conditions thereof, upon his partial admission and after a hearing, and imposing a determinate term of two years’ imprisonment and two years’ post-release supervision upon his previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree.

Ordered that the amended judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion and in the interest of justice, by reducing the term of imprisonment imposed upon the defendant’s previous conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree to a definite term of one year, and vacating the term of post-release supervision; as so modified, the amended judgment is affirmed.

A finding of a violation of probation must be based upon the preponderance of the evidence *(see*CPL 410.70 [3]; *People v Maldonado,*44 AD3d 793, 794 [2007]; *People v Mikulski,*225 AD2d 563 [1996]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Supreme Court properly found, based upon a preponderance of the evidence presented at a hearing, that he violated the conditions of his probation by failing to comply with his probation officer’s directive to appear for drug testing on two occasions. Moreover, prior to the hearing, the defendant admitted that he had violated a condition of probation by failing to report for an employment referral appointment.

However, under the circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed upon the revocation of the defendant’s probation was excessive to the extent indicated *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.E, Eng, Belen and Hall, JJ., concur.
No. 264.

#### Standard Wholesale Phosphate & Acid Works, Inc. *v.*General Chemical Co.

October 14, 1935.

*Messrs. Clair W. Fairbank*and *William R. Perkins*for petitioner.

*Mr. W. Brown Morton*for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
No. 76-1009.

#### Zemprelli *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 quarterly report of SiriCOMM, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2006 which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 20, 2007 (the “Report”), I, Mark L. Grannell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| /s/ Mark L. Grannell    |
|-------------------------|
| Mark L. Grannell        |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| February 20, 2007       |

 

A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
H. Res. 1295 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

May 6, 2010. 

Whereas Mother’s Day is celebrated on the second Sunday of 

each May; 

Whereas the first official Mother’s Day was observed on May 

10, 1908, in Grafton, West Virginia, and Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania; 

Whereas 2010 is the 102nd anniversary of the first official 

Mother’s Day observation; 

Whereas in 1908, Elmer Burkett, a U.S. senator from Nebraska, proposed making Mother’s Day a national holiday; 

Whereas in 1914, Congress passed a resolution designating 

the second Sunday of May as Mother’s Day; 

Whereas it is estimated that there are more than 82,000,000 

mothers in the United States; 

Whereas mothers have made immeasurable contributions toward building strong families, thriving communities, and 

ultimately a strong Nation; 

Whereas the services rendered to the children of the United 

States by their mothers have strengthened and inspired 

the Nation throughout its history; 
2 

•HRES 1295 EH 

Whereas George Washington said, ‘‘My mother was the most 

beautiful woman I ever saw. All I am I owe to my mother. I attribute all my success in life to the moral, intellectual, and physical education I received from her.’’; 

Whereas Abraham Lincoln said, ‘‘All that I am or ever hope 

to be, I owe to my angel mother.’’; 

Whereas we honor ourselves and mothers in the United 

States when we revere and emphasize the importance of 

the role of the home and family as the true foundation 

of the Nation; 

Whereas mothers continue to rise to the challenge of raising 

their families with love, understanding, and compassion, 

while overcoming the challenges of modern society; and 

Whereas May 9, 2010, is recognized as Mother’s Day: Now, 

therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives celebrates 

the role of mothers in the United States and supports the 

goals and ideals of Mother’s Day. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
      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
Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly
Report based on such evaluation; and
 d)
    
    disclosed in this Quarterly 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
  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:      November 12, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Ehssan TaghizadehEhssan Taghizadeh, President and CEO
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-46,766-07

EX P ARTE ROBERT LEE COOP ER JR. , Appli cant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W99-23389-L(F ) IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 5

F ROM DALLAS COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Tex as C o d e o f Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was conv i ct ed of t he offense of ag g rava ted sexual assault of a c hild and sentenc ed to imprisonment for life. The writ application was filed in the trial court on September 20, 2016. No order desig nating issues appea

rs in the rec ord, but a g ree d finding s rec ommending relief on one of two g rounds wer e signe d on September 23, 2016. The habea s rec ord has been proper ly forwa rded to this Court by the district cler

k. However , t h e rec ord has been forwa rded without the t rial court having resolved allthe issues in this case . We rema n d t h is application to the Criminal District Court Number 5 of Dallas County to allow the trial judge to complete an evidentiar y investiga tion and enter additional finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law a s nece ssary . This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolved within 9 0 d ay s o f this order

. A supplemental transcr ipt containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order. A ny extensions of ti me must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court. Filed: Nove mber 2, 2016 Do not publish
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: MOUSTAPHA AHMAD TABBARA 

CITATION: 30 Agric. Dec. 325 

DOCKET NUMBER: 132 

DATE: MARCH 30, 1971 

DOCUMENT TYPE: DISMISSAL 

(No. 13,738) 

In re MOUSTAPHA AHMAD TABBARA. CEA Docket No. 132. Decided March 30, 1971. 

Dismissal -- Service of complaint not perfected 

Decision by Thomas J. Flavin, Judicial Officer

DISMISSAL

In this disciplinary proceeding under the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 

ch. 1) the complainant has filed a motion to dismiss the complaint because of 

the inability of complainant since 1966 to obtain service of a copy of the 

complaint upon respondent a foreign national living abroad. 

Accordingly the complaint is dismissed. 

LOAD-DATE: June 10, 2008 
Page 2
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

2009-3156 

KIMBERLY DENSON, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

 Respondent. 

George C. Nicols, Attorney at Law, PLLC, of Jackson, Mississippi, argued for 

petitioner. 

Kenneth M. Dintzer, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, 

United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent. On 

the brief were Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, 

Franklin E. White, Jr., Assistant Director, and Scott A. MacGriff, Trial Attorney. 

Appealed from: Merit Systems Protection Board
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

 2009-3156 

KIMBERLY DENSON, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, 

 Respondent. 

 Judgment

ON APPEAL from the Merit Systems Protection Board 

in CASE NO(S). AT0752080612-I-1 

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

Per Curiam (GAJARSA, PLAGER and LINN, Circuit Judges). 

 AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36. 

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 

DATED November 12, 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly 

Jan Horbaly, Clerk
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: GENERAL COMMERCE CORPORATION 

DOCKET NUMBER: 76 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington 25, D. C. 

ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT - CEA DOCKET NO. 76 

(Administrative Hearing under the Commodity Exchange Act) 

A complaint and notice of hearing has been signed by the Assistant Secretary 

of Agriculture, charging violation of the Commodity Exchange Act by: 

General Commerce Corporation 

571 Central Avenue 

Newark, New Jersey 

The complaint charges that the respondent on numerous occasions in 1956 and 

1957, when it held positions in lard futures on the Chicago Board of Trade 

ranging from 1,040,000 pounds to 1,640,000 pounds in a single future, failed or 

refused to make reports to the Commodity Exchange Authority in violation of 

section 4i of the Commodity Exchange Act and sections 9.10, 9.11, 9.12, and 9.21 

of the rules and regulations thereunder. 

The issuance of a complaint under the Commodity Exchange Act does not 

constitute proof of violation of the law. Such violation is established only 

when the Judicial Officer of the Department has made a determination that the 

evidence substantiates allegations in the complaint. Complaints are filed in 

the Office of the Hearing Clerk of the Department of Agriculture and are a 

matter of public record. Pending disposition by the Judicial Officer, it is the 

policy of the Commodity Exchange Authority not to comment or elaborate on 

charges contained in complaints or to discuss evidence on which they are based. 

A public hearing on the complaint is scheduled to be held before a referee at 

10:00 a.m., local time, April 30, 1957, at New York, New York. 

LOAD-DATE: June 12, 2008 
Page 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ricardo CRUZAGOSTO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-30474.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 13, 2010.*

Filed Oct. 12, 2010.

James Barkley, Esquire, Thomas Bradley, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Anchorage, AK, William C. Brown, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Robert Michael Leen, Esquire, Law Office of Robert M. Leen, Woodinville, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ricardo Cruzagosto appeals from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for sentence reduction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Cruzagosto contends that the district court erred when it failed to lower his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) following the United States Sentencing Commission’s adoption of Amendment 706. We affirm in light of *Dillon v. United States,*— U.S.-, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Exhibit 31.2
       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 reasonable likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  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.
  /s/ PETER WHITFIELD

Peter Whitfield
Acting Co-Chief Executive Officer, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 117 (Monday, June 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 32805]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15228]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP99-301-022]


ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of Negotiated Rate Filing

June 12, 2001.
    Take notice that on June 4, 2001, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 
tendered for filing and approval four Service Agreements between ANR 
and PCS Nitrogen Ohio, L.P., BP Chemicals, Inc. and Premcor Refining 
Groups, Inc. (Shipper) pursuant to ANR's Rate Schedule FTS-1 (together 
referred to as the Shipper Agreements).
    ANR states that the Shipper Agreements contain negotiated rate 
arrangements between ANR and Shipper. ANR requests that the Commission 
accept and approve the Shipper Agreements to be effective June 1, 2001.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via 
the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the 
instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-15228 Filed 6-15-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 31.1
 Section 302 Certification
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of A. H. Belo Corporation;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; andc)
    
    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; andb)
    
    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.
  /s/ Robert W. Decherd

Robert W. DecherdChairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           APR-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         339,526
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  533,904
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               910,469
<PP&E>                                         470,675
<DEPRECIATION>                                 335,845
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,386,549
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,376,708
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               50
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,017
<OTHER-SE>                                     (19,227)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,386,549
<SALES>                                      2,749,372
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,749,372
<CGS>                                        1,741,183
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,741,183
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,552,292
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,027
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (512,336)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (512,336)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (60,139)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (572,475)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.19)



</TABLE>