alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please

2 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 

3 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated

4 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does

5 not include the filing date. 

6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

7 STATE OF NEW MEXICO,

8 Plaintiff-Appellee,

9 v. NO. 30,746

10 PATRICK MAZZEI,

11 Defendant-Appellant.

12 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY

13 Robert M. Schwartz, District Judge

14 Gary K. King, Attorney General

15 Santa Fe, NM

16 for Appellee

17 Fuentes & Associates, P.C.

18 Robert R. Fuentes

19 Rio Rancho, NM 

20 for Appellant

21 MEMORANDUM OPINION

22 VIGIL, Judge.

23 Defendant appeals from a conditional plea and disposition agreement in which

24 he pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated driving under the influence (Fourth or
2

1 Subsequent Offense). [RP 115] This Court issued a calendar notice proposing to

2 dismiss Defendant’s appeal for lack of a final order. Specifically, we proposed to

3 conclude that because sentencing was left pending while the Defendant’s case was

4 referred to drug court, and because no final judgment and sentence was entered,

5 Defendant’s notice of appeal was premature. See State v. Garcia, 99 N.M. 466, 471,

6 659 P.2d 918, 923 (Ct. App. 1983) (holding that in a criminal case the final judgment

7 is the judgment and sentence or an order dismissing all charges against the defendant).

8 Defendant has filed a response to this Court’s notice of proposed summary

9 disposition. In his response, Defendant concurs with this Court’s proposed disposition

10 of dismissal. We therefore dismiss Defendant’s appeal as premature. Defendant may

11 re-file his appeal once a final judgment and sentence has been entered.

12 IT IS SO ORDERED.

13 _______________________________

14 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge

15 WE CONCUR:

16 _________________________________ 

17 MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge

18 _________________________________

19 RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Judge
# CE2004070EN.01006402.xml

| 20.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 70/64 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 70/64

---

(2004/C 70 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1846/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(3 June 2003)

Subject:   Incompatibility between the holding of a Community decision-making office and membership of the Bilderberg Club and the Trilateral Commission

Subject:

The Bilderberg Club — one of the most secretive organisations wielding covert globalist power — can count amongst its members and/or assiduous participants at its closed meetings the Commission President, Roman Prodi, and the following Commissioners: Mario Monti, Erkki Liikanen, Frederik Bolkestein, Pedro Salbes Mira, Günther Verheugen, Chris Patten and Antonio Vitorino. A further associate is Tommaso Padoa Schioppa of the European Central Bank.

Furthermore, some of the above are also members of the Trilateral Commission, another covert centre of globalist power.

Will the Commission say whether the Commissioners in question can confirm the above information and, if so, whether they consider that, in the interests of transparency, they should disclose membership of such bodies in their official CVs?

Does the Commission not think that secret affiliations of this nature may lead to serious and irremediable conflicts of interest between Commission decisions and the purposes, objectives and secret (or, at least, highly confidential) decisions of the Bilderberg Club and the Trilateral Commission — non-democratic bodies whose members are co-opted and which are not subject either to the ballot box or to scrutiny by the media?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(6 August 2003)

(6 August 2003)

The Commission would refer to the answer it recently gave to Written Question E-1370/03 by Ms Patricia McKenna (1) on the same subject.

1

As was explained in that answer, the status of member of the Bilderberg Club is not defined by the statutes of the Club and occasional attendance at one or other meeting does not mean that a person can be deemed to be a member of the Club, nor does it warrant a reference in the declaration of interests provided for by the Code of Conduct for Commissioners.

Moreover, no Commissioner is a member of the Trilateral Commission, whose statutes exclude persons holding public office from membership.

With regard to the last paragraph, which raises the question of a possible conflict of interest, it should be pointed out that this is not the case as occasional attendance at meetings of outside bodies does not imply that the person concerned shares their objectives or takes part in their decision-making processes.

---

(1)  OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 192.

1

---
### NUMBER 13

- 16

- 00 162

- C V



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI C EDINBURG

AMERICAN SURGICAL AS SISTANTS,

INC. D/B/A AMERICAN SURGI CAL

PROFESSIONALS

, Appellant,

v.

JUAN JOHNNY DE DIOS VILLEGAS, ET AL.

, Appellee s

.

On appeal from the 148 th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.



## ORDER TO FILE REPORTER ’ S RECORD

Before Justices Garza, Perkes, and Longoria

Order Per Curiam

This cause is before the Court on the reporter ’ s failure to file the record. The

reporter ’ s record in this matter was originally due on June 20 , 2016 . The reporter has

previously requested and received three extensions of time to file the record. The2

reporter has filed a fourth extension requesting an additional 45 days to file the reporter’s

record.

The Court, having fully examined and considered the extensions previously

granted in this cause, is of the opinion that, in the interest of justice, an order should be

entered. The Court looks with disfavor upon the delay caused by the reporter ’ s failure

to have filed the record in this matter.

Reporter, Sandra Chavez , is hereby ORDERED to file the reporter ’ s record in this

Court on or before December 19, 2016

. No further motions for extension of time will be

entertained by the Court. If the r eporter fails to file the record within the foregoing

specified period of time, the Court will act appropriately to avoid further delay and to

preserve the parties ’ rights. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3 (a)(2).

PER CU RIAM

Do not publish.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

De livered and filed

the 17 th day of November, 2016

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                         0000930832
<NAME>                        JetFleet III
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         1,332,210
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    131,360
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,463,570
<PP&E>                                        13,196,240
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,618,510
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                13,978,160
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,059,230
<BONDS>                                       11,076,350
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                    1,661,450
<COMMON>                                         815,200
<OTHER-SE>                                      (634,070)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  13,978,160
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,599,790
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 798,690
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               684,520
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  116,580
<INCOME-TAX>                                       2,880
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              113,700
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                     113,700
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0.14



</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00634-CR

Steven VELASCO,

Appellant

v.

The 

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 227th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR4702

Honorable Philip A. Kazen, Jr., Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice1

Delivered and Filed: December 23, 2014

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Appellant Steven Velasco is seeking to appeal from the trial court’s order modifying the 

conditions of his probation. An order modifying the conditions of probation is not appealable at 

the time of the modification. A defendant may appeal the judgment placing him on probation. 

TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.12(23)(b) (West Supp. 2014). A defendant may also appeal 

an order revoking his probation. Id. Those are the two opportunities permitting an appeal in a 

case involving probation. Basaldua v. State, 558 S.W.2d 2, 5 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977).

1 Not participating.

 
04-14-00634-CR

On September 30, 2014, this court ordered Velasco to show cause in writing no later than 

October 30, 2014, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Velasco did 

not respond to our order. Accordingly, because this court lacks jurisdiction to consider an appeal 

of an order modifying the conditions of probation, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 

Id.

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH

- 2 -
STATE v. Teon Jamell WILLIAMS.

No. 8P16-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 17, 2016.

Teon Jamell Williams, Tabor City, for Williams, Teon Jamell.

Joseph L. Hyde, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Sarah Kirkman, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 7th of January 2016 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

> "Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of March 2016."
----

(2004/C 65 E/152)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2378/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 July 2003)

Subject:   Transparency requirements

Further to the Commission's answer to question E-1885/03 (1) on 3 July, will the Commission now list as requested all those individuals and organisations which submitted written documents concerning transparency obligations, and will it note in each case whether that submission was supportive of or antagonistic towards or indifferent to quarterly reporting of one form or another? Will the Commission forward and publish the summary document prepared for the Commissioner on the results of the consultation?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(4 September 2003)

In addition to the answer already given to the Honourable Member's Written Question E-1885/03, the Commission is in a position to provide the following information:

----

(1)OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 152.

(2)  COM(2003) 138 final.

(3)  http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/finances/mobil/transparancy.htm

----
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-3410

_____________________________

STEVEN P. MCKENNEY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Bruce Anderson, Judge.

January 7, 2019

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED.

WETHERELL, OSTERHAUS, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

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

9.331.

_____________________________

Steven P. McKenney, pro se, Appellant.
2

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
# CE2004078EN.01018701.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/187 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/187

---

(2004/C 78 E/0194)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2909/03

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(29 September 2003)

Subject:   Future status of Tibet

Subject:

In a recent interview published in Le Figaro, the Dalai Lama stated that he ‘hope[d] that there would be others [other contacts with the Chinese] and that they would lead to serious discussions’. He believes that ‘at present there is basically nothing new. Since the 1980s we have been demanding self-determination and no longer independence. The Chinese know that perfectly well.’ The Dalai Lama added: ‘Tibetan youth organisations clearly want independence. They do not agree with me. But there is no conflict between us on that account. To be honest, if my approach were to fail, these young people would have a perfect right to take up the torch and demand independence. One must be patient. It is barely a year since contacts with China were resumed. But, if in two or three years’ time they have not borne any fruit, it will be difficult for me to explain to young people why the ‘middle way’ in the right one.'

Is the Commission aware of the radical change in the position of the Tibetan leadership which is implied by the unambiguous statement that it will be necessary to find a solution very soon (within two or three years)? Ought not the European Union to do everything it can to induce the Chinese authorities and the Tibetan government in exile to reach agreement quickly on defining a fully autonomous status for Tibet in all fields except defence and foreign policy? Is the Commission aware that, after the period of two or three years mentioned by the Dalai Lama, Tibet is liable to become a fresh source of tension or even the scene of violence and bloody repression? Could not the Commission help to bring about the opening of such negotiations by proposing that the EU Member States recognise the Tibetan government in exile?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 2003)

(15 October 2003)

In its regular dialogue with China, particularly on human rights, the Commission has unfailingly expressed its opinion that establishing direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama is the only realistic way of seeking a practical and lasting solution to the Tibetan question based on granting the region full autonomy.

In this connection, it followed with interest the visit by the special envoys of the Dalai Lama to China between 25 May and 8 June 2003 and considers that everything should be done to avoid compromising the contacts made recently between the parties concerned.

---
STATE v. Salim Abdu GOULD.

No. 91P14-3.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 24, 2015.

Salim Abdu Gould, Windsor, for Gould, Salim Abdu.

*854Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Valerie Mitchell Asbell, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th of August 2015 by Defendant of Leave to File Individual Writ of Certiorari:

> "Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of September 2015."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 46 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 46

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the permissible 
 use of health savings accounts to include premiums for non-group high 
                    deductible health plan coverage.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 4, 2007

   Mr. Ensign (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Graham, and Mr. Coburn) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                          Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the permissible 
 use of health savings accounts to include premiums for non-group high 
                    deductible health plan coverage.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Affordability in the Individual 
Market Act''.

SEC. 2. USE OF HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS FOR NON-GROUP HIGH DEDUCTIBLE 
              HEALTH PLAN PREMIUMS.

    (a) In General.--Section 223(d)(2)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 (relating to exceptions) is amended by striking ``or'' at the 
end of clause (iii), by striking the period at the end of clause (iv) 
and inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following new 
clause:
                            ``(v) a high deductible health plan, other 
                        than a group health plan (as defined in section 
                        5000(b)(1)).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2007.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 597 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 473
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 597

                          [Report No. 110-222]

 To extend the special postage stamp for breast cancer research for 2 
                                 years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 14, 2007

Mrs. Feinstein (for herself, Mrs. Hutchison, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Boxer, 
   Ms. Snowe, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Kyl, Mr. 
Voinovich, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Domenici, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Warner, 
   Mr. Salazar, Mr. Biden, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Graham, Mr. Baucus, Mr. 
 Thomas, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Burr, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Sununu, 
    Mrs. Dole, Mr. Bond, Mr. Hatch, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Bunning, Mr. 
  Lieberman, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Specter, Mr. Grassley, Mr. 
   Sanders, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Cochran, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
     Martinez, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Bayh, Mr. 
  Lautenberg, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Roberts, Mr. 
Lugar, Mr. Brown, Mr. Coleman, Mr. Corker, Mr. Obama, Ms. Collins, Mr. 
McCain, Mr. Whitehouse, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Nelson of Florida, Mr. Smith, and 
  Mr. Inhofe) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

                            November 7, 2007

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the special postage stamp for breast cancer research for 2 
                                 years.

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

SECTION 1. 2-YEAR EXTENSION OF POSTAGE STAMP FOR BREAST CANCER 
              RESEARCH.

    Section 414(h) of title 39, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``2007'' and inserting ``2009''.
                                                       Calendar No. 473

110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 597

                          [Report No. 110-222]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To extend the special postage stamp for breast cancer research for 2 
                                 years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            November 7, 2007

                       Reported without amendment
```
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 179 (Friday, September 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18436]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 10180 and <greek-i> 10181]


Alabama Disaster Number AL-00003

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Alabama (FEMA-1605-DR), dated 08/29/
2005.
    Incident: Hurricane Katrina.
    Incident Period: 08/29/2005 and continuing.
    Effective Date: 09/08/2005.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 10/28/2005.
    EIDL Loan Application Deadline Date: 05/29/2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Disaster Area Office 3, 14925 Kingsport Road Fort 
Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, Suite 
6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the Presidential disaster 
declaration for the State of Alabama, dated 08/29/2005, is hereby 
amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the 
disaster:

Primary Counties:
    Choctaw, Clarke, Greene, Hale, Pickens, Sumter, Tuscaloosa.
Contiguous Counties:
    Alabama, Bibb, Fayette, Jefferson, Lamar, Marengo, Perry, Walker, 
Wilcox.
    Mississippi, Clarke, Kemper, Lauderdale, Lowndes, Noxubee.

    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)
Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. 05-18436 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
----

(2004/C 33 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1642/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 May 2003)

Subject:   Subjecting of EU citizens to an American points and bargaining system in place of procedures to establish the truth and normal administration of criminal justice

Source: TV Nederland 3, current affairs programme ‘Nova’, 3 May 2003

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2003)

----