alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 28, 2020.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-19-00882-CR

ERIK GONZALES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 185th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1271795

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On January 2, 2014, appellant Erik Gonzales was adjudicated guilty of assault 

of a family or household member by impeding breath. The trial court sentenced 

appellant to four years’ imprisonment. Appellant filed a notice of appeal on October 

23, 2019. 

A defendant’s notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days after sentence is 

imposed when the defendant has not filed a motion for new trial. See Tex. R. App. 

P. 26.2(a)(1). A notice of appeal that complies with the requirements of Rule 26.2 is 
2

essential to vest the court of appeals with jurisdiction. Slaton v. State, 981 S.W.2d 

208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). If an appeal is not timely perfected, a court of 

appeals does not obtain jurisdiction to address the merits of the appeal. Under those 

circumstances it can take no action other than to dismiss the appeal. Id. Appellant’s 

notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after sentence was imposed. 

On November 21, 2019, notification was transmitted to all parties of the 

court’s intention to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction unless, within 30 days, 

any party showed that the court has jurisdiction. No response was filed.

We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Zimmerer, Spain, and Hassan.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael J. McClure, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Affirmative Insurance
Holdings, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 to the best of my knowledge, that:



|(3) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 (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
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(4) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This certificate is being furnished solely for purposes of Section 906.

Date: May 11, 2009



/s/ Michael J. McClureMichael J. McClureExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CURLIN PENNICK, III,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

JOE WILLIAMSON, Cook, Stafford

Creek Correctional Center,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 13-35120

D.C. No. 3:11-cv-05971-RBL

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Ronald B. Leighton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 13, 2014** 

Before: CLIFTON, BEA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges. 

Washington state prisoner Curlin Pennick, III, appeals pro se from the

district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that the

denial of kosher meals for over two days during Passover violated his First

FILED

MAY 29 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Amendment rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de

novo. Garcia v. County of Merced, 639 F.3d 1206, 1208 (9th Cir. 2011). We

affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on the basis of

qualified immunity because there was no genuine dispute of material fact as to

whether defendant Williamson reasonably relied on the Passover meals-list which

mistakenly omitted Pennick. See Estate of Ford v. Ramirez-Palmer, 301 F.3d

1043, 1049-50 (9th Cir. 2002) (holding that a prison official may be entitled to

qualified immunity where he has a reasonable, but mistaken, belief about the facts

or about what the law requires in a given situation); see also Hunter v. Bryant, 502

U.S. 224, 229 (1991) (per curiam) (“The qualified immunity standard ‘gives ample

room for mistaken judgments’ by protecting ‘all but the plainly incompetent or

those who knowingly violate the law.’” (citation omitted)).

Pennick’s motion to supplement the record on appeal, filed on June 10,

2013, is denied.

AFFIRMED. 

2 13-35120
STATE of North Carolina v. Robert A.D. WALDRUP

No. 189P17-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 1, 2017

Mr. Robert A.D. Waldrup, For Waldrup, Robert A.D.

Ms. Tracy Nayer, Assistant Attorney General, For State of North Carolina.

Mr. Mike Miller, District Attorney, For the State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 1st of September 2017 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Lincoln County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st of September 2017 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st of September 2017 by Defendant to Appoint Counsel:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 1st of September 2017 by Defendant to Append Motion for Appropriate Relief:

*693"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."
SOMA TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. DALAMAGAS, et al.

307PA17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 21, 2017

Sam McGee, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Desai, Hiren.

Daniel F.E. Smith, Robert J. King, III, Jonathan M. Shapiro, Attorneys at Law, for Soma Technology, Inc.

Paul J. Stevens, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Dalamagas, Photios, et al.

The following order has been entered on the joint motion filed on the 21st of November 2017 by Plaintiff to Withdraw Appeals:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 21st of November 2017."
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                       ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE


The undersigned certifies that she is an Assistant Vice President of GreenPoint
Credit, LLC (the "Servicer") and that, as such, she is duly authorized to
execute and deliver this certificate on behalf of the Servicer pursuant to
Section 4.20 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement"), dated as
of March 1, 1999 between GreenPoint Credit Corp., as Seller, GreenPoint Credit
Corp, as Servicer, and The First National Bank of Chicago, as Trustee, (all
capitalized terms used herein without definition having the respective meanings
specified in the Agreement) and further certifies that:

1.   I have reviewed the activities for the one year period ending December 31,
     1999 and performance under this agreement has been made under such
     officer's supervision under Section 4.20 of the Agreement; and

2.   To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has
     fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement throughout such period.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed hereunto my signature this 29th day of
February, 2000.



                                        GREENPOINT CREDIT, LLC

                                        By /s/ Mary Churley
                                           ----------------
                                           Mary Churley
                                           Assistant Vice President and Manager
                                           Investor Servicing
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 21

                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

                                      Jurisdiction of   Other Names under which
Subsidiary                            Incorporation     Subsidiary does Business

Ahab Investment Company               Delaware          N/A

Ahab International Investment Co.     Delaware          N/A

Astro Air Coils, Inc.                 Pennsylvania      N/A

Astro Air UK, Ltd.                    United Kingdom    N/A

DWZM, Inc.                            Pennsylvania      N/A

GBMC, Inc.                            Kansas            N/A

Cramer Company
(formerly M.H. Rhodes Inc.)           Delaware          N/A

Motor Products -
       Ohio Corporation               Delaware          N/A

Motor Products -
       Owosso Corporation             Delaware          N/A

Owosso Motor Group, Inc.              Pennsylvania      N/A

Snowmax Incorporated                  Pennsylvania      N/A

Stature Electric, Inc.                New York          N/A
#### In the Matter of Francis Peter EAGEN, III.

No. 837 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

July 29, 2003.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 29th day of July, 2003, a Rule having been entered by this Court on May 19, 2003, pursuant to Rule 214(d)(1), Pa.R.D.E., directing Francis Peter Eagen, III, to show cause why he should not be placed on temporary suspension, upon consideration of the responses filed, it is hereby

ORDERED that the Rule is made absolute; Francis Peter Eagen, III, is placed on temporary suspension pursuant to Rule 214(d)(2), Pa.R.D.E.; he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.; and the matter is referred to the Disciplinary Board pursuant to Rule 214(f)(1), Pa. R.D.E.
STATE of North Carolina v. Galen Lee SMITH

No. COA17-1116

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: June 5, 2018

NO ERROR.
#### In re the MARRIAGE OF Kaye A. Mullins McKENZIE, Petitioner/Respondent, v. John K. McKENZIE, Respondent/Appellant.

No. ED 81495.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

June 3, 2003.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 24, 2003.

Application for Transfer Denied Aug. 26, 2003.

*502Newton G. Mccoy, Schwartz, Herman *&*Davidson Law Offices, St. Louis, MO, for Appellant.

Elaine Ann Pudlowski, Vines, Frankel, Rubin, Bond & Dubin Law Offices, Clayton, MO, for Respondent.

Steven William Neimeyer, Clayton, MO, Guardian Ad Litem.

Before WILLIAM H. CRANDALL, JR., P.J., SHERRI B. SULLIVAN, J., and GLENN A. NORTON, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

John K. McKenzie (Husband) appeals from the Judgment and Decree of Dissolution (Decree) entered by the trial court on April 2, 2002, as modified by the First Amended Decree and Judgment of May 30, 2002, dissolving his marriage to Kaye A. Mullins McKenzie (Wife). We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and conclude that the judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence. *Murphy v. Carron,*536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo.banc 1976). An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. We have provided the parties with a memorandum for their use only setting forth the reasons for our decision. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Missouri Rule of Civil Procedure 84.16(b).
STATE of North Carolina v. Eric Christopher FORD

No. COA17-1407

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 17, 2018

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 5TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 20, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-51222 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus STEVEN FLOREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-527-ALL

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent Steven Florez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Florez has filed a response and a motion for a writ of coram nobis. The motion for writ of coram nobis is DENIED. Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Florez’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Florez’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v.No. 06-51222 -2- Cantwell , 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS
DISMISSED. See 5TH C IR . R. 42.2.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA

No. 1 00P A14

FILED 10 April 2015

TERRY WAYNE WOOD

v. JEREMY NUNNERY , NORTH CAROLINA FARM BUREAU MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, and FIREMEN’S INSURANCE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON, D.C.

On discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A

- 31 of a unanimous,

unpublished decision of the Court of Appeals, ___ N.C. App. ___, 757 S.E.2d 526
(20 14 ), affirming an order entered on 11 February 2013 by Judge Ed win G. Wilson,

Jr. in Superior Court, Forsyth County. On 11 June 2014 , the Supreme Court allowed
plaintiff’s conditional petition for discretionary review as to additional issues. Hear d

in the Supreme Court on 12 January 2015

.

Maynard & Harris, Attorneys at Law, PLLC, by C. Douglas Maynard, Jr. , for plaintiff

- appellant/appellee

. Van Laningham Duncan PLLC, by L. Cooper Harrell; Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP, by James G. Exum, Jr.; and Bennett & Guthrie, PLLC, by Rodney A. Guthrie and Rober ta King Latham, for defendant

appellant/appellee Jeremy Nunnery

. Brown Moore & Associates, PLLC, by Jon R. Moore; and White & Stradley, PLLC, by J. David Stradley, for North Carolina Advocates for Justice, amicus curiae

. Pinto Coates Kyre & Bowers, PLLC, by Deborah J. Bowers , for North Carolina Association of Defense Attorneys, amicus curiae

.

PER CURIAM.W OOD V

. N UNNERY

Opinion of the Court

- 2

- DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.
STATE v. Brandon MALONE

379A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 31, 2018

Paul M. Green, Durham, Attorney at Law, for Malone, Brandon

Mr. Jess D. Mekeel, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina

Mr. James Ryan Grant, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Malone, Brandon

Mr. Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State *627The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 31st of May 2018 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 31st of May 2018."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 6th day of July 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
Exhibit 21


                                       PennFed Financial Services, Inc.

                                       SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                           Percentage       State
                                                                              of        of Incorporation
          Parent                                Subsidiary                 Ownership    or Organization
--------------------------------    -----------------------------------    ---------    ---------------
<S>                                 <C>                                       <C>       <C>
PennFed Financial Services, Inc.    Penn Federal Savings Bank                 100%      United States

PennFed Financial Services, Inc.    PennFed Capital Trust II                  100%      Delaware

PennFed Financial Services, Inc.    PennFed Capital Trust III                 100%      Delaware

Penn Federal Savings Bank           Penn Savings Insurance Agency, Inc.       100%      New Jersey

Penn Federal Savings Bank           Ferry Development Holding Co.             100%      Delaware

Penn Federal Savings Bank           Eagle Rock Investment Corp.               100%      New Jersey

Penn Federal Savings Bank           PennFed Title Service Corporation         100%      New Jersey
</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.1

 

Second Amended and Restated Director Compensation Policy

Effective July 1, 2014

 

Annual Compensation For Board Members:

 

·                  $150,000 of which, $100,000 is awarded by equity awards and $50,000 is awarded in cash, payable quarterly.

 

	
Additional Committee Chair Fees (payable   quarterly):
    	
 
    
	
Audit Committee:
    	
 
    	
$
    	
22,000
    	
 
    
	
Compensation Committee:
    	
 
    	
$
    	
15,000
    	
 
    
	
Nominating/Corporate Governance:
    	
 
    	
$
    	
10,000
    	
 
    
	
Lead Director
    	
 
    	
$
    	
15,000
    	
 
    


 

Subject to the terms herein, the equity awards granted as part of the annual compensation set forth above will be made at the Board Meeting immediately following the meeting of stockholders, commencing with the 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

 

Equity Awards granted to board members shall be in the form of restricted stock (or other similar equity award instrument as agreed to by the compensation committee); these shares will vest in three equal installments annually at a rate of 33.33%, with the first installment vesting on the next September 1 following the annual meeting of stockholders, with vesting each one year anniversary thereafter.  The annual restricted stock award granted to a non-employee director under the non-employee director compensation policy will be made at the board of directors’ meeting immediately following our annual meeting of stockholders.

 

In addition, we will make, under our 2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (or plan that is in effect), a one-time, initial restricted stock award of $50,000 (with the number of shares determined by dividing $50,000 by the fair market value of the closing price of our common shares on the date of grant) to any new non-employee director (who was not previously a director) who joins the board of directors. These shares will vest in three equal installments annually at a rate of 33.33%, with the first vesting date on the anniversary of the first day of the third month of the quarter following the director’s join date.

 

The vesting of all of the equity awards granted to our non-employee directors will also accelerate by 12 months in the event of a change in control.
In the MATTER OF the Foreclosure of a Deed of Trust Executed by Rebecca WORSHAM and Greg B. Worsham Dated January 8, 2007 and Recorded in Book 21638 at Page 600 in the Mecklenburg County Public Registry, North Carolina.

No. COA17-1268

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: July 3, 2018

REVERSED. REMANDED.
STATE v. Quintel Martinez AUGUSTINE

130A03-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 13, 2018

Gretchen Engel, Attorney at Law, Durham, James E. Ferguson, II, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Augustine, Quintel Martinez.

Danielle Marquis Elder, Special Deputy Attorney General, Jonathan P. Babb, Special Counsel to Attorney General, William R. West, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

Grady Jessup, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Association of Black Lawyers.

Lisa A. Bakale-Wise, Attorney at Law, Irving Joyner, Attorney at Law, Durham, for N.C. State Conference of the NAACP.

Edward Joseph Blocher, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Social Scientists.

Janet Moore, Attorney at Law, for National Association for Public Defense.

Robert P. Mosteller, Attorney at Law, for Professors John Charles Boger & Robert P. Mosteller.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th of July 2018 by National Association for Public Defender for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

*365"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 13th of July 2018."
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mewbourne Energy Partners 04-A, L.P. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated below and 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, as amended, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:             May 16, 2011



/s/ Curtis W. MewbourneCurtis W. MewbourneChief Executive OfficerMewbourne Development Corporation,Managing General Partner of the Registrant
STATE of North Carolina v. Willie James BOLDER

No. 283P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2018

M. Gordon Widenhouse, Jr., Attorney at Law, for Bolder, Willie James.

Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, Nicholaos Vlahos, Assistant Attorney General, Roxann L. Vaneekhoven, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 22nd of August 2017 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2018."
COOPER v. BERGER, et al.

409PA17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 31, 2018

Mr. Noah H. Huffstetler, III, Raleigh, Attorney at Law, for Berger, Philip E., et al

Mr. Jim W. Phillips, Jr., Greensboro, Attorney at Law, for Cooper, Roy A. (III)

Mr. Eric M. David, Raleigh, Attorney at Law, for Cooper, Roy A. (III)

Mr. Daniel F.E. Smith, Greensboro, Attorney at Law, for Cooper, Roy A. (III)

Mr. D. Martin Warf, Raleigh, Attorney at Law, for Berger, Philip E., et al

Ms. Candace S. Friel, Winston-Salem, Attorney at Law, for Berger, Philip E., et al

Mr. Grayson Kelley, Raleigh, Chief Deputy, for Cooper, Roy A. (III)

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 30th of May 2018 by Defendants:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 31st of May 2018."

*628Defendants shall have up to and including the 5th day of July 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.