alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UPMC, et al., Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES, EX REL. J. William BOOKWALTER, III, et al.

No. 19-1149.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 27, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-6562

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff ─ Appellee,

v.

RECARDO DOMICEKE BLAKNEY,

Defendant ─ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(4:06-cr-00584-RBH-1; 4:11-cv-70024-RBH)

Submitted: August 25, 2011 Decided: September 16, 2011

Before WYNN and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Recardo Domiceke Blakney, Appellant Pro Se. Arthur Bradley 

Parham, Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South 

Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Recardo Domiceke Blakney seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 

Supp. 2011) motion. The order is not appealable unless a 

circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (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 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (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. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Blakney has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we 

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts
3

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional.

DISMISSED
EXHIBIT 32.b



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 Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund V L.P. (the "Fund") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Principal Financial Officer of the Fund's general partner, Boston Capital Associates V L.L.C., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)-15 or 15(d)-15 of the Securities and 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 Fund.



|                  |  |                            
|----------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date:             |  |                            
|February 22, 2005 |  | /s/ Marc N. Teal           
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  | Marc N. Teal               
|                  |  | Principal Financial Officer
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  |                            



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other

document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Glen MOORE, Petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division

No. 18-9113

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Christopher Andrew TANK, Petitioner v. MICHIGAN.

No. 19-6474

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

May 29, 2019

No. 04

- 19

- 00086

- CR

Nathan FOUGHT

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR10858 Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant’s court

- appointed public defender has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 368 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues to raise on appeal. Counsel has informed appellant of his right to file his own brief and provided appellant

with a form motion for re questing the appellate record. See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 319

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014 ); Nichols v. State , 954 S.W.2d 83, 85 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997,

no writ )

. The Sta te has filed a letter waiving its right to file an appellee’s brief unless the appellant files a pro se brief.

If appellant desires to request the appellate record, he must file the motion requesting the record within ten (10) days of the date of this or der. If appellant desires to file a pro se brief, he must do so within twenty (20) days of the date of this order. If appellant files a pro se brief, the State may file a responsive brief no later than twenty (20) days after the date appellant’s pro se

bri ef is filed in this court. It is further ORDERED that the motion to withdraw, filed by appellant’s counsel, is HELD IN ABEYANCE pending further order of the court.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 29th day of May, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
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 Quarterly Report of Physicians Formula Holdings, Inc.
(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Joseph J.
Jaeger, Chief Financial 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




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




The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.




Date: May
5, 2008




By:
            /s/
      Joseph J. JaegerName:
            Joseph
      J. JaegerTitle:
            Chief
      Financial Officer







A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Physicians Formula
Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Physicians Formula
Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 6
<CIK> 0000910068
<NAME> HIGH INCOME OPPORTUNITY FUND INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>                      787,507,893
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>                     745,165,400
<RECEIVABLES>                               23,648,147
<ASSETS-OTHER>                                     931
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             768,814,478
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>                    10,890,783
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>                              0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>                    2,963,300
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>                         13,854,083
<SENIOR-EQUITY>                                      0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>                   899,379,128
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>                       72,230,352
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>                       72,016,610
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>                  (1,389,020)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>                               0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>                  (100,023,741)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>                             0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>                  (43,005,972)
<NET-ASSETS>                               754,960,395
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>                            1,040,131
<INTEREST-INCOME>                           82,405,729
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<EXPENSES-NET>                               9,586,140
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>                     73,859,720
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>                  (41,919,147)
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>                 (14,161,100)
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>                       17,779,473
<EQUALIZATION>                                       0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>                   74,739,391
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>                             0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>                                0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>                              0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>                          0
<SHARES-REINVESTED>                            213,742
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>                    (54,666,463)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>                    (1,966,392)
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>                 (57,109,572)
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>                              0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>                           0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>                        9,153,937
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>                              9,586,140
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>                       795,844,708
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>                            11.24
<PER-SHARE-NII>                                  01.03
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>                         (0.79)
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>                             01.03
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>                            0
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>                                 0
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>                              10.45
<EXPENSE-RATIO>                                  01.20


</TABLE>
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1118 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to prohibit corporations which employ or retain registered lobbyists from making expenditures or disbursements for electioneering communications under such 

Act, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 13, 2013 

Mr. GRAYSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to 

prohibit corporations which employ or retain registered 

lobbyists from making expenditures or disbursements for 

electioneering communications under such Act, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘Pick Your Poison Act of 2013’’. 

6 (b) FINDINGS.—Congress finds the following: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1118 IH

1 (1) Independent expenditures made in connec2 tion with elections for public office, including those 

3 made by corporations, give rise to corruption and 

4 the appearance of corruption, as well as undue influ5 ence and access. 

6 (2) This corruption, and the appearance of this 

7 corruption, threatens to cause the electorate to lose 

8 faith in our democracy. 

9 SEC. 2. BAN ON EXPENDITURES AND DISBURSEMENTS FOR 

10 ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS BY 

11 CORPORATIONS EMPLOYING OR RETAINING 

12 REGISTERED LOBBYISTS. 

13 Section 316 of the Federal Election Campaign Act 

14 of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441b) is amended by adding at the end 

15 the following new subsection: 

16 ‘‘(d) SPECIAL RULE FOR CORPORATIONS EMPLOYING

17 OR RETAINING REGISTERED LOBBYISTS.—A corporation 

18 may not make any expenditure, or make any disbursement 

19 for an electioneering communication, if it employs or re20 tains a registered lobbyist under the Lobbying Disclosure 

21 Act of 1995.’’. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.a

I, John P. Manning, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund V L.P.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 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:



1. 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;
2. 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
3. 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





1. 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):



1. 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
2. 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.



|February 22, 2005 | /s/ John P. Manning
|----------------- | -------------------
|                  | John P. Manning    
|                  | Principal          
|                  | Executive Officer  
|                  |                    
|                  |
<PAGE>

Exhibit (4)(1)         Form of Common Stock Certificate

                NUMBER                                           SHARES
             ------------                                     -------------

              INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE


                         MARKETING WORLDWIDE CORPORATION

                             Total Authorized Issue
                       100,000,000 Shares $.001 Par Value
                                  Common Stock

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT________________________________________________ IS THE
OWNER OF __________________________________________________ fully paid and
non-assessable shares of the above Corporation transferable only on the books of
the Corporation by the holder thereof in person or by a duly authorized Attorney
upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed.


WITNESS the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized
officers.
DATED:


--------------------------                           --------------------------
SECRETARY                                                     PRESIDENT



                                       59
FRANK G., Petitioner v. RENEE P.-F., et al.

No. 18-1431

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Motion of New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Motion of Marriage Law Foundation for leave to file a brief as *amicus curiae* granted. Motion of Adam J. MacLeod for leave to file a brief as *amicus curiae* granted. Motion of Them Before Us for leave to file a brief as *amicus curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Second Judicial Department denied.
Arthur O. ARMSTRONG, Petitioner v. NORTH CAROLINA, et al.

No. 19-5886

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 12, 2019

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petitions for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.2 CERTIFICATION REQUIRED BY
RULE 13a-14(a) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 CERTIFICATIONS  I, W. Anderson Geater, Jr., certify that:6.
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Origen Financial, Inc.;7.
    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;8.
    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;9.
    The registrants other certifying officer 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:  d)
    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 annual report is being prepared;e)
    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; andf)
    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  10.
    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 registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):  c)
    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; andd)
    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. Dated: May 16, 2005
    
    /s/ W. Anderson Geater, Jr.W. Anderson Geater, Jr.,Chief Financial Officer of Origen Financial, Inc.
Benjamin E. SCHREIBER, Petitioner, v. Nick LUDWICK, et al.

No. 19-5265

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.