alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-0677

_____________________________

JONTEZ L. ANDERSON,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Martin A. Fitzpatrick, Judge.

September 24, 2020

B.L. THOMAS, J.

Appellant argues that the trial court erred by allowing the 

victim to testify via closed-circuit television and failing to conduct 

a proper competency hearing. We affirm Appellant’s first 

argument without further discussion and reverse on his second 

argument for the following reasons. 

This Court reviews the legal question of due process in 

competency proceedings de novo. Bowden v. State, 279 So. 3d 311, 

313 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019). “According to Florida Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 3.210(b) and case law, once the court has reasonable 

grounds to question the defendant’s competency, the court has no 

choice but to conduct a hearing to resolve the question.” Zern v. 

State, 191 So. 3d 962, 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016). Failure to hold a 
2

competency hearing and enter a written order is fundamental 

error and requires reversal. Dortch v. State, 242 So. 3d 431, 433 

(Fla. 4th DCA 2018). 

Here, prior to trial, Appellant filed a motion to have his 

competency evaluated. The trial court granted Appellant’s motion 

and appointed Dr. Harry A. McClaren to evaluate Appellant. Dr. 

McClaren interviewed and evaluated Appellant and provided a 

written report expressing his finding that Appellant was 

competent to proceed. After Dr. McClaren provided his evaluation, 

no evidentiary hearing occurred and no written order regarding 

Appellant’s competency was entered. 

“If the trial court fails to hold a competency hearing or enter 

a written order of competency, reversal is required; however, a new 

trial is required only if the trial court is unable to conduct a nunc 

pro tunc evaluation of the defendant’s competency at the time of 

the original trial.” Brooks v. State, 180 So. 3d 1094, 1095 (Fla. 1st 

DCA 2015). Because the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary 

hearing and issue a written order on Appellant’s competency, this 

Court must reverse and remand for the trial court to conduct a 

nunc pro tunc evaluation of Appellant’s competency or conduct a 

new trial. Id. at 1096. 

REVERSED and REMANDED. 

LEWIS and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Candace K. Brower, Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, 

and Michael J. Titus, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, 

Tallahassee, for Appellant.
3

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Holly N. Simcox, Assistant 

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO SECTION 302  OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of GNC 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; 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.
 October 27, 2006
    
    /s/ Curtis J. Larrimer

Curtis J. LarrimerChief Financial Officer
HomeEducationTides and Water Levels

# Tides and Water Levels

## References

Ross, D.A. 1995. Introduction to Oceanography. New York, NY: HarperCollins. pp. 236-242.

Sumich, J.L. 1996. An Introduction to the Biology of Marine Life, sixth edition. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown. pp. 30-35.

Thurman, H.V. 1994. Introductory Oceanography, seventh edition. New York, NY: Macmillan. pp. 252-276.

### Tides and Water Levels

              - Welcome
              - What are Tides?
              - What Causes Tides?
              - Gravity, Inertia, and Bulges
              - Changing Angles and Tides
              - The Frequency of Tides
              - Tidal Variations
              - Types and Causes of Tidal Cycles
              - What Else Affects Tides?
              - Monitoring the Tides
              - Old System
              - New System
              - References
              - Roadmap to Resources 
              - Subject Review

----

National Science Teaching Association (NSTA)

###### **Search** Education

###### Get **Social**

Contact Us

            - Provide Feedback 
            -  Contact Us 
            -  Report an error 

##### Science. Service.Stewardship.

###### 						About NOS 					

            - About Us
            - NOS Program Offices
            - Media Inquiries
            - Website Acknowledgements

###### 						Resources 					

            - Site Index
            - Disclaimer
            - Freedom of Information Act
            - Accessibility

###### 						More Resources 					

            - Information Quality
            - Privacy Policy
            - NOS For Employees
            - USA.gov

          -  National Ocean Service
          -  National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
          -  Department of Commerce

##### 						Social 					

            - 
            - 
            - 
            - 
            -
# C_2018077EN.01000102.xml

| 1.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8665 — Discovery/Scripps)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 77/02)

On 6 February 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8665. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8665. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
```

                                                                    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 Chardan China Acquisition Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 (the
"Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I Richard D. Propper, M.D., Chairman of the Board of the Company,
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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, as amended; and

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

By: /s/ Richard D. Propper                              Dated: November 19, 2004
    -------------------------------------
    Richard D. Propper, M.D.
    Chairman of the Board
    (Principal Executive Officer)
```
STATE v. SHELLHAMMER.

No. COA04-297.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed June 7, 2005.

Certification Date June 27, 2005.

Appeal from Onslow (02CRS59178)

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
Anthony DOVE v. Debra SPELLER.

No. 511P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 6, 2005.

David J. Fillippeli, Jr., Kinston, for Debra Speller.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 11th day of March 2005 by Plaintiff for "Petition for Rehearing":

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court In conference this the 6th day of April 2005."
WHITEHEAD v. SPARROW ENTERPRISE.

No. 5P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 29, 2005.

James L. Ward, Jr., Mount Pleasant, SC, Paul M. Platte, Columbia, SC, for Sparrow Enterprise, Inc.

*240The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th day of March 2005 by Plaintiff for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference this the 29th day of July 2005."
Exhibit
10.4


 





 


2019
Russ Embry Bonus Compensation Plan


 


On-target
bonus compensation for 2019 shall be 35% of salary. 75% of the on-target bonus will be a cash component based upon the percentage
of 2019 budgeted EBITDA achieved. 25% of the on-target bonus will be a discretionary award of Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) from
the 2015 Omnibus Incentive Plan, as amended, based on the percentage completion of the targets listed in Appendix A.


 


For
the avoidance of doubt, if the on-target bonus were $75,000, and all targets are achieved, then:


 


	 	●	$56,250 would be the cash component
	 	●	$18,750 would be the value of the RSUs awarded


 


The
percentage payout for the cash component will be based on the percentage of EBITDA target achieved in the following table:


 


	 

        Budgeted

        EBITDA
        Loss
	 

        Percentage
        of

        EBITDA
        Target
	Minimum

        Additional

        EBITDA
	Percentage
        of

        On-Target

        Bonus
        Paid

	 	Less
    than 90%	 	0%
	 	90%
    - 94.99%	$
    (229,889.00)	25%
	 	95%
    - 99.99%	$
    (114,944.50)	90%
	$(2,298,890)	100%
    - 104.99%	$-	100%
	 	105%
    - 109.99%	$114,944.50	105%
	 	110%
    - 114.99%	$229,889.00	110%
	 	115%
    - 119.99%	$344,833.50	115%
	 	120%
    - 124.99%	$459,778.00	125%
	 	125%
    - 129.99%	$574,722.50	150%
	 	130%
    and Greater	$689,667.00	175%
	 	 	 	 
	 	On-Target	 	 
	 	Indicates
    EBITDA Positive in Q4 2019	 


 


All
EBITDA targets are net of the bonus expense.





 


	 	●	The EBITDA will be determined by Management as part of the 2019 year-end
                                    close with final determination to be made by the Board




	 	●	The bonus amount
    will be confirmed by the board no later than the March 2020 Board meeting, payable on the next payroll date.
	 	●	The executive team
    member must be an active employee on the date of payment in order to receive the bonus


 


	Signature	/s/
    Russell T. Embry	 	Date
    5/1/2019


 


Intellicheck,
Inc – Company Confidential


 



    	 	 	 



    	 



     


 


Appendix
A


Russell
Embry


 


	 	1.	Completion and acceptance
    of deployment of ID Check V5 by 11/29/2019
	 	2.	Specifications,
    development plan and target date of ID Template project completed by 7/24/2019 with 2019 development plan milestones achieved.
    Full release in 2020
	 	3.	Architecture, development
    plan and target date of reporting database completed by 6/1/2019, Data available 10/18/19. Full release in 2020.


 


Intellicheck,
Inc – Company Confidential


 












    	 	1
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 39808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-14243]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Record of Decision for the Environmental Impact Statement T-7A 
Recapitalization at Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, TX

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: On June 21, 2022, the Department of the Air Force (DAF) signed 
the Record of Decision (ROD) for the T-7A Recapitalization at Joint 
Base San Antonio (JBSA)-Randolph, TX Environmental Impact Statement.

ADDRESSES: Mr. Nolan Swick, AFCEC/CZN, 2261 Hughes Avenue, Suite 155, 
JBSA-Lackland Air Force Base, Texas 78236-9853, (210) 925-3392; 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#85ebeae9e4ebabf6f2ece6eec5f0f6abe4e3abe8ece9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="680607040906461b1f010b03281d1b46090e46050104">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DAF has decided to replace all T-38C 
aircraft at JBSA-Randolph with up to 72 T-7A aircraft and continue 
flying training programs at JBSA-Randolph. The DAF decision documented 
in the ROD was based on matters discussed in the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement, inputs from the public and regulatory agencies, and 
other relevant factors. The Final Environmental Impact Statement was 
made available to the public on March 4, 2022 through a Notice of 
Availability in the Federal Register (Volume 87, Number 43, Page 12450) 
with a waiting period that ended on April 4, 2022.
    Authority: This Notice of Availability is published pursuant to the 
regulations (40 CFR part 1506.6) implementing the provisions of the 
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and the Air 
Force's Environmental Impact Analysis Process (32 CFR parts 989.21(b) 
and 989.24(b)(7)).

Adriane Paris,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022-14243 Filed 7-1-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-10-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
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 Justice

          - 28 CFR Part 68

### CFR Correction

This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

In Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 43 to end, revised as of July 1, 2021, in § 68.30, in paragraph (e), remove and replace the two commas following the first sentence with a new second sentence to read as follows:

§ 68.30 

* * * * *

(e) * * * In the event of disqualification or recusal of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer as provided in this section, the review shall be referred to the Director for further proceedings. * * *

[FR Doc. 2022-13994 Filed 6-28-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 0099-10-P
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

I, David A. Chaput, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of General Moly, Inc. for thequarter ended June 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information containedin such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all materialrespects the financial condition and results of operations of General Moly, Inc.

 

Dated: August 4, 2009

 
|   | By:    | /s/ David A.  Chaput     |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|
|   | Name:  | David A. Chaput          |
|   | Title: | Chief  Financial Officer |
|        |        |                          |  |

 

----
Exhibit 32.1
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
     I, Edward F. Feighan, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief ExecutiveOfficer of ProCentury Corporation (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
(1) amendment no. 1 to the quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A ofthe Company for the period ended March 31, 2004 which thiscertification accompanies fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and
(2) the information contained in amendment no. 1 to thequarterly report on Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.
/s/ Edward F. Feighan
<PAGE>

                                                                EXHIBIT NO. 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

     We have issued our report dated September 14, 2001, accompanying the
consolidated financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of
ProsoftTraining.com on Form 10-K for the year ended July 31, 2001. We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration
Statements of ProsoftTraining.com on Form S-3 (File Nos. 333-40982, 333-30336,
333-35249, 333-28993, 333-11247, 333-53000, 333-57764 and 333-64196) and on Form
S-8 (File No. 333-19477, 333-67425, 333-51360 and 333-53472).

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Dallas, Texas
October 23, 2001
STATE v. RICHARDS

No. COA04-1029

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed August 16, 2005

Certification Date September 6, 2005

Appeal from Buncombe (03CRS4450, 03CRS4451, 03CRS4452, 03CRS4453).

Cases reported without published opinion. No prejudicial error.
dvn-ex101_660.htm



Exhibit 10.1

Amendment 2019-1
to the
Devon Energy Corporation
defined contribution RESTORATION Plan

The Devon Energy Corporation Defined Contribution Restoration Plan (the "Plan") is amended, effective as of July 1, 2019, as follows:

1.Section 4.1 of the Plan ("Company Contributions") is amended in its entirety to read as follows:

"4.1Company Contributions.  The Company Contributions for a Plan Year (or other applicable determination period) will be equal to the amount of Company contributions that would have otherwise been allocated to the Participant under the Qualified Plan, but for (i) the application of Section 401(a)(17) of the Code, and (ii) the reduction in the Participant's eligible compensation under the Qualified Plan to reflect deferrals in a non-qualified deferred compensation plan sponsored by the Company.  Further, a Participant shall only be eligible to receive Company Contributions under this Plan for a Plan Year (or other applicable determination period) if and to the extent that the Participant satisfies the eligibility requirements (including, without limitation, the requirement to be employed by the Company as of a specified date or dates) to receive a Company contribution under the Qualified Plan for such period."

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

 

 



 

DB1/ 104659481.2

 
 


 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Devon Energy Corporation (acting through its authorized delegate) has caused this Amendment 2019-1 to the Plan to be executed this 19th day of June, 2019.  

DEVON ENERGY CORPORATION

 

By:_ /s/ Tana K. Cashion
Name:  Tana K. Cashion
Title:  Senior Vice President, Human Resources



 
[Signature Page to Amendment 2019-1 to the Devon Energy Corporation Defined Contribution Restoration Plan]