alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under

the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 30, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40916

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

DAVID DANIEL SALAZAR,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. G-87-CR-28-ALL

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

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before JONES, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This court affirmed the sentence of David Daniel Salazar.

United States v. Salazar, No. 03-40916 (5th Cir. Apr. 9, 2004)

(unpublished). The Supreme Court vacated and remanded for further

consideration in light of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738

(2005). See Salazar v. United States, 125 S. Ct. 1038 (2005). We

requested and received supplemental letter briefs addressing the

impact of Booker. 
No. 03-40916 

-2-

Salazar argues that the district court erred by enhancing his

sentence based upon judge-found facts that were not admitted by him

or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He asserts that

this issue should be reviewed under the harmless error standard

because he raised the substance of this issue both in the district

court and this court.

While Salazar challenged the factual findings underpinning the

drug quantity determination both in the district court and this

court, he did not raise a Sixth Amendment challenge or make an

objection based upon Booker, Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296

(2004), or Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). His

objections were not sufficient to preserve this issue for review.

See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 516-17 & n.2, 520 (5th

Cir. 2005), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). The

earliest that Salazar could have raised this issue was in his

petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court. We will not consider

a Booker-related challenge raised for the first time in a petition

for certiorari absent extraordinary circumstances. United States

v. Taylor, 409 F.3d 675, 676 (5th Cir. 2005).

Salazar identifies “no evidence in the record suggesting that

the district court would have imposed a lesser sentence under an

advisory guidelines system.” Id. at 677; see also Mares, 402 F.3d

at 521-22. Accordingly, Salazar has not shown that his sentence

was plainly erroneous. See Taylor, 409 F.3d at 677. Because

Salazar has not demonstrated plain error, “it is obvious that the
No. 03-40916 

-3-

much more demanding standard for extraordinary circumstances,

warranting review of an issue raised for the first time in a

petition for certiorari, cannot be satisfied.” Id.

Because nothing in the Supreme Court’s Booker decision

requires us to change our prior affirmance in this case, we

reinstate our judgment affirming Salazar’s convictions and

sentences.

AFFIRMED.
STATE v. PEMBERTON.

No. COA05-1083.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed April 18, 2006.

Certification Date May 8, 2006.

Appeal from the Stanly (03CRS50974).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
# L_2013187EN.01002701.xml

| 6.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 187/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 187/27

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EU) No 1220/2012 of 3 December 2012 on trade related measures to guarantee the supply of certain fishery products to Union processors from 2013 to 2015, amending Regulations (EC) No 104/2000 and (EU) No 1344/2011

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 349 of 19 December 2012
  )

On page 6, Annex, Order No 09.2798, fourth column ‘Description’:

for:

‘Shrimps and prawns of the species Pandalus borealis, in shells, fresh, chilled or frozen for processing (1) (2) (4)’,

Pandalus borealis

1

2

4

read:

‘Shrimps and prawns of the species Pandalus borealis, in shells, fresh, chilled or frozen for processing (1) (2)’;

Pandalus borealis

1

2

on page 7, Annex, Order No 09.2762, second column ‘CN Code’:

for:

‘
  ex 0306 11 90

ex 0306 21 90
  ’,

read:

‘
  ex 0306 11 90

ex 0306 21 90

ex 0306 11 10
  ’;

on page 7, Annex, Order No 09.2762, third column ‘TARIC Code’:

for:

‘
  10

10
  ’,

read:

‘
  10

10

10
  ’.

---
CATER, et al. v. BARKER.

No. 546A05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 10, 2006.

Creighton W. Sossomon, Highlands, for Catherine Barker.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of February 2006 by Plaintiff to Consent to Waive Oral Argument:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 10th day of February 2006."
STATE v. David AHMADI-TURSHIZI.

No. 92P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 6, 2006.

Anthony M. Brannon, Raleigh, for David Ahmadi-Turshizi.

C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd day of February 2006 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion for Stay Dissolved by order of the Court in conference this the 6th day of April 2006."
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21



                  GOLDEN STATE BANCORP INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES



Golden State Bancorp Inc.

     Golden State Financial Corporation
          Glendale Federal Bank, Federal Savings Bank
               EFT Services, Inc.
               Glendale Investment Corporation
                     GLENFED Capital Corp.        
                     GLENFED Financial Corporation
                     GLENFED Reimbursement, Inc.   
               GLENFED Mortgage Corporation    
               GLENFED Insurance Services, Inc. 
               Verdugo Trustee Services Corporation   
               Glendale Brokerage Services, Inc.      
               GLENFED Service Corporation             
                     Esandel, Inc.               
                     August Financial Corporation 
                          August Advisors, Inc. 
                               AGP, Inc. 
                          August Management, Inc. 
               First Estate Corporation 
                     GLENFED Development Corp. 
                          GLENFED Development Ventures Corp.
                          GLENFED Realty Investments         
                               GLENFED Investment Properties, Inc. 
                     GLENFED Properties, Inc. 
                          Oceanside Communities, Inc.  
                          Glenco Executive Center, Inc. 
               California Outlook, Inc. 
                     Nassau Bay Properties, Inc. 
               Crescent Bay Diversified            
               PFS Corporation                     
               CenFed Investment Corporation       
               United Resources Capital Corporation 
                     United Energy Finance Company 
               United California Financial Company    
               United California Funding Corporation  
               RedFed Escrow, Inc.                    
               RedFed, Inc.                           
               Redlands Financial Services, Inc.
STATE v. George Franklin PAGE.

No. 239A96-5.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 10, 2005.

Amiel J. Rossabi, for George Franklin Page.

Valerie B. Spalding, Special Deputy Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th day of August 2005 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Petition for Writ of Certiorari:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (George Franklin Page) shall have up to and including the 12th day of August 2005 to file his Petition for Writ of Certiorari with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 10th day of August 2005."
HUANG v. HUANG.

No. COA05-1186.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed May 16, 2006.

Certification Date June 5, 2006.

Case without published opinion. The Appeal is dismissed.
**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

Inconnection with the Annual Report of MarkWest Hydrocarbon, Inc. (the “Company”),on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2006, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Frank M. Semple, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

(1) TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
| Date: March 21, 2007 |   |   | By:    | /S/FRANK M. SEMPLE                                                   |
|----------------------|--------|--------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                 |   |   |   | Frank M. Semple                                                      |
|                 |   |   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer  (Principal Executive Officer) |

 

Thiscertification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosuredocument. This certification shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes ofSection 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”), or otherwise subject to liability under that section. This certificationshall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under theSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the extentthis Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by referencein any such filing.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
**EXHIBIT
32.1**
 
 
 **CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO**
 **SECTION
906 OF THE**
 **SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002**
 
 I, Todd
M. Raba, President of MidAmerican Energy Company (the “Company”), certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, that to the best of my knowledge:
 
 (1)
    the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period
      ended March 31, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements
      of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
      U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and(2)
    the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 
 Dated:
May 6, 2005
 
 
 /s/
Todd M. Raba
 Todd M.
Raba
 President
 (chief
executive officer)
# L_2012272EN.01002001.xml

| 6.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 272/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 272/20

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) No 653/2012 of 17 July 2012 initiating a ‘new exporter’ review of Council Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of polyethylene terephthalate originating, inter alia, in Taiwan, repealing the duty with regard to imports from one exporter in this country and making these imports subject to registration

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 188 of 18 July 2012
  )

On page 8, recital 4, first sentence:

for:

‘The measures currently in force are a definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 (2) under which imports into the Union of the product under review originating in Taiwan, including the product produced by the applicant, are subject to a definitive anti-dumping duty of 143,4 % with the exception of two companies specially mentioned which are subject to individual duty rates.’,

2

read:

‘The measures currently in force are a definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 192/2007 (2) under which imports into the Union of the product under review originating in Taiwan, including the product produced by the applicant, are subject to a definitive anti-dumping duty of EUR 143,4/t with the exception of two companies specially mentioned which are subject to individual duty rates.’.

2

---
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Helicos BioSciencesCorporation (the  “Company”) for theperiod ended June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report), we Stanley Lapidus, the Principal ExecutiveOfficer of the Company and Louise Mawhinney, the Principal Financial andAccounting Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to ourknowledge that:

(1)          the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

(2)          the information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
| Dated: August 8,  2007 | /s/ Stanley N.  Lapidus-                                      |                                         |   |
|------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   | President and Chief Executive Officer                         |                                         |
|                   |                                                          | (Principal Executive Officer)                |
|                   |                                                          |                                         |
| Dated: August 8, 2007  | /s/ Louise Mawhinney                                          |                                         |   |
|                   | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and  Treasurer |                                         |
|                   |                                                          | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|                        |                                                               |                                              |        |  |  |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5517 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.5517

                       One Hundred Tenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
            the third day of January, two thousand and eight

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  7231 FM 1960 in Humble, Texas, as the ``Texas Military Veterans Post 
                                Office''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TEXAS MILITARY VETERANS POST OFFICE.
    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 7231 FM 1960 in Humble, Texas, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Texas Military Veterans Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Texas 
Military Veterans Post Office''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
SABO v. ELECTRONIC SERVICES MART, INC.

No. COA05-997

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed March 21, 2006

Certification Date April 10, 2006

Appeal from Mecklenburg (04CVS9097).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-51437 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. VICTOR ALBERTO GONZALES-ROBLES, alsoknown asVictor Gonzalez, also known as Victor Gonzalez-Robles, also known asVictor H Gonzales, also known as Victor Gonzales, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CR-178-ALL Before WIENER, STEWART, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Victor Alberto Gonzales-Robles has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Gonzales-Robles has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D November 28, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-51437

2 GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR. R. 42.2.
HARCO NAT. INS. CO. v. BDO SEIDMAN, LLP.

No. COA05-1429.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed June 20, 2006.

Certification Date July 10, 2006.

Appeal from Wake (05CVS2299).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.2**
**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**
     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Dex Media West LLC (the"*Company*”) hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:
     (i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company forthe quarterly period ended September 30, 2004 (the “*Report*”) fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.        Dated: November 10, 2004 /s/ Robert M. Neumeister, Jr.   Robert M. Neumeister, Jr.   Executive Vice President and
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

L

A M ONICA BURTON , Appellant

,

v.

JIMMIE LEE BURTON , JR., Appellee

.

No

. 4D 22

- 1602

[ May 25, 2023 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seven teen th Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael Davis

, Judge ; L.T. Case No. FMCE21

- 006033

.
Robin F. Hazel of Hazel Law, P.A., Hollywood , for appellant

.

Gustavo E. Frances of The Law Office of G u stavo E. Frances, P.A., Fort Lauderdale

, for appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

K LINGENSMITH , C.J., G ROSS , and C IKLIN , J J ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-95,135-01

EX PARTE JEREMY CHRISTIAN MOFFITT, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 114-0071-21-A IN THE 114TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM SMITH COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Applicant was convicted of evading arrest or detention that caused serious bodily injury and

sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment. He filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the

county of conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODECRIM. PROC.

art. 11.07.

Applicant contends that he was denied the right to an appeal because appellate counsel who

was initially appointed to represent him on appeal failed to timely file a notice of appeal. Based on

the record, the trial court has found that Applicant’s right to an appeal was denied because appellate

counsel did not take timely steps to secure the notice of appeal as required. We agree that Applicant

was denied his right to appeal, but find that it was due to a breakdown in the system as opposed to
2

the ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

Relief is granted. Ex parte Riley, 193 S.W.3d 900 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Applicant may

file an out-of-time appeal of him conviction in cause number 114-0071-21 from the 114th District

Court of Smith County. Within ten days from the date of this Court’s mandate, the trial court shall

determine whether Applicant is indigent. If Applicant is indigent and wants to be represented by

counsel, the trial court shall appoint counsel to represent him on direct appeal. Should Applicant

decide to appeal, he must file a written notice of appeal in the trial court within thirty days from the

date of this Court’s mandate.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminalJustice–Correctional

Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles. 

Delivered: February 14, 2024

Do not publish
COURT OF APPEALS

S E C O N D D I S T R I C T O F T E X A S

CHIEF JUSTICE

 TERRIE LIVINGSTON

JUSTICES

 LEE ANN DAUPHINOT

 ANNE GARDNER

 SUE WALKER

 BILL MEIER

 LEE GABRIEL

 BONNIE SUDDERTH

TIM CURRY CRIMINAL JUSTICE CENTER

401 W. BELKNAP, SUITE 9000

FORT WORTH, TEXAS 76196-0211

TEL: (817) 884-1900

FAX: (817) 884-1932

www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa

CLERK 

 DEBRA SPISAK

CHIEF STAFF ATTORNEY

 LISA M. WEST

GENERAL COUNSEL

 CLARISSA HODGES

December 3, 2015

Paul Francis

P.O. Box 13369

1178 W. Pioneer Parkway

Arlington, TX 76013

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. Mollee Westfall

Judge, 371st District Court

Tim Curry Criminal Justice Center

401 W. Belknap St., 5th Floor

Fort Worth, TX 76196

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Criminal District Clerk, Tarrant County

Tim Curry Criminal Justice Center

401 W. Belknap, 3rd Floor

Fort Worth, TX 76196-0402

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Debra A. Windsor

Assistant District Attorney

401 W. Belknap St.

Fort Worth, TX 76196-0201

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

Hon. David L. Evans

Regional Presiding Judge

Tom Vandergriff Civil Courts Bldg.

100 N. Calhoun St., 2nd Floor

Fort Worth, TX 76196

* DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL *

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 02-15-00148-CR, 02-15-00150-CR

Trial Court Case Number: 1370580D, 1370579D

Style: Kyle Christopher HowardJohnson

v.

The State of Texas

Today the Second Court of Appeals issued an opinion and judgment in the 

above-referenced causes. 

Copies of the opinion and judgment are attached and can also be viewed on our 

Court’s webpage at: http://www.txcourts.gov/2ndcoa.
02-15-00150-CR

December 3, 2015

Page 2

Respectfully yours,

DEBRA SPISAK, CLERK