alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Amy S. GRISSOM v. David I. COHEN

No. 40P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 5, 2018

Jonathan D. Feit, Attorney at Law, Preston O. Odom, III, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Grissom, Amy S.

Tom J. Bush, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, Kevin L. Miller, Attorney at Law, H. Stephen Robinson, Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, for Cohen, David I.

*164***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 5th of February 2018 in this matter for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 prior to a determination by the North Carolina Court of Appeals, 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 5th of April 2018."
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Pablo Figueroa, Appellant.

[720 NYS2d 354]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Leone, J.), rendered October 24, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to disprove his agency defense is not preserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Bradley,*199 AD2d 327). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support a finding that the People disproved the defense of agency and established the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Herring,*83 NY2d 780, 782; *People v Lam Lek Chong,*45 NY2d 64, 75, *cert denied*439 US 935; *People v Carr,*254 AD2d 91; *People v Nieves,*214 AD2d 590; *People v Askew,*194 AD2d 341; *People v Baker,*176 AD2d 153). Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be ac*533corded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the finder of fact (see, *People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, *People v Garafolo,*44 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
#### Demetrius WALLACE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D03-2084.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

July 23, 2003.

Demetrius Wallace, Avon Park, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *See*§ 958.14, Fla. Stat. (1995); *Young v. State,*697 So.2d 75 (Fla.1997); *Johnson v. State,*678 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

STEVENSON, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
#### T.C., A Child, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D02-5006.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 26, 2003.

Rehearing Denied Aug. 19, 2003.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, Attorneys for Appellant.

Charlie Crist, Attorney General, and Bryan Jordan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, Attorneys for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a juvenile, was charged with battery by an inmate in a juvenile facility. Because Appellant was held in a juvenile facility, Appellant argued that the crime of simple battery could not be enhanced from first degree misdemeanor to a third degree felony because section 784.082(3), Florida Statutes (2002), does not apply to a child detained in a juvenile facility. The trial court found that this enhancement statute applied to a juvenile detention center and denied the motion to dismiss.1 We disagree, and remand with directions.

Nothing in section 784.082 indicates that the statute applies to juveniles held in juvenile facilities. Accordingly, we reverse the adjudication of delinquency for battery as a third degree felony and remand for entry of a judgment for simple battery, a first degree misdemeanor.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

ALLEN, C.J., and BOOTH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

1

. Appellant pleaded no contest while preserving the right to appeal the denial of the motion to dismiss. On November 20, 2002, Appellant was adjudicated delinquent and committed to moderate risk.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Leroy Smith, Appellant.

[718 NYS2d 857]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.), rendered June 22, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, the plea of guilty is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

We agree with the defendant that he should be permitted to withdraw his plea because “[t]he record demonstrates that the defendant’s plea was entered into upon the mistaken belief of the court and the parties that the Division of Parole possessed the discretion to run any undischarged sentence concurrently with the negotiated sentence imposed in this case,” when, in fact, the terms are required to run consecutively *(People v Scott,*237 AD2d 543, 544; *see also, People v Lowman,*237 AD2d 621). Although this issue was not preserved for appellate review, we reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction *(see,*CPL 470.15 [6]). Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Krausman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 23.2**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements: 1) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-120692),  2) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-94782),  3) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-22211),  4) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-43267),  5) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-39282),  6) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-65592), and  7) Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-125571);  of Liberty Property Trust and Liberty Property Limited Partnership and in the relatedProspectuses of our reports dated February 26, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedule of Liberty Property Limited Partnership, and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting of Liberty Property Limited Partnership, included inthis Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP         Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Robert A. BARTLETT Sr., Plaintiff v. NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant.

No. COA17-935

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: March 20, 2018

AFFIRMED.
#### Raymond SMITH v. Don Carnell LAWHORN, the Honorable Larry Cager, and the Honorable W. Fox McKeithen, in Their Official Capacities Only.

No. 2003-CC-2591.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 17, 2003.

In re Lawhorn, Don Carnell et al.;— Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. I, No. 2003-13064; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No(s). 2003-C-1610, 2003-CA-1615.

“Not considered. Not timely filed. See La. R.S. 18:1409(G); Supreme Court Rule X, Section 5(c).”
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

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on December 8, 2004, pursuant to section 6(a) of the national cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), the IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, NHSU, London, United Kingdom has been added as a party to this venture.                

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On April 7, 2000, IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on September 13, 2000 (65 FR 55283).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on September 21, 2004. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on November 29, 2004 (69 FR 69395).                

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 05-1973  Filed 2-1-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
STATE of North Carolina v. Jamal M. WATSON

No. 107P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Teresa M. Postell, Assistant Attorney General, Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Daniel F. Read, Attorney at Law, Durham, for Watson, Jamal M.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 9th of April 2018 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Dissolved by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 9th of April 2018 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 9th of April 2018 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:

"Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 7th of June 2018."
STATE v. Felix Ricardo SALDIERNA

271PA15-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2018

W. Rob Heroy, Attorney at Law, Charlotte, for Saldierna, Felix.

Kimberly N. Callahan, Assistant Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 24th of January 2018 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th of January 2018."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 8th day of March 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
STATE of North Carolina v. Tonya Michelle LEATH

No. COA17-567

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: April 17, 2018

NO PLAIN ERROR.
# Official Journal C 221/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 221 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4914 September 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 221

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4914 September 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 221/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2006/C 221/2 | Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Council Directive 93/15/EEC of 5 April 1993 on the harmonisation of the provisions relating to the placing on the market and supervision of explosives for civil uses (1) | 2 |
| 2006/C 221/3 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4383 — APHL/Permira/Clessidra/Sisal) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 7 |
| 2006/C 221/4 | Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1) | 8 |
| | EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA |
| | EFTA Surveillance Authority |
| 2006/C 221/5 | EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision — No 41/04/COL of 17 March 2004 amending for the fortyfourth time the procedural and substantive rules in the field of state aid by introducing a new chapter 24b: framework on state aid to shipbuilding (1) | 10 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2006/C 221/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2006/C 221/2

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of the Council Directive 93/15/EEC of 5 April 1993 on the harmonisation of the provisions relating to the placing on the market and supervision of explosives for civil uses (1)

2

2006/C 221/3

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4383 — APHL/Permira/Clessidra/Sisal) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

7

2006/C 221/4

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty — Cases where the Commission raises no objections (1)

8

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA Surveillance Authority

2006/C 221/5

EFTA Surveillance Authority Decision — No 41/04/COL of 17 March 2004 amending for the fortyfourth time the procedural and substantive rules in the field of state aid by introducing a new chapter 24b: framework on state aid to shipbuilding (1)

10

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Peter BUFFA and wife, Stacy Buffa v. CYGNATURE CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT, INC.; Granite Hardwoods, Inc.; The Hardwood Company; Windsor Window Company d/b/a Windsor Windows and Doors; Christopher Wotell; and Gary Sovel

No. 46P17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 17, 2017

Daniel K. Bryson, Attorney at Law, Matthew E. Lee, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Buffa, Peter, et al.

Patrick M. Wallace, Attorney at Law.

Hannah Styron Symonds, Attorney at Law, for The Hardwood Company, et al.

Wilson Elser, Attorney at Law.

John I. Malone, Jr., Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Windsor Window Company, et al.

Michael P. North, Attorney at Law, Jeffrey M. Markowitz, Attorney and Counselor at law, for Windsor Windows And Doors (d/b/a).

*158Paul E. Culpepper, Attorney at Law, Hickory, for Cygnature Construction And Development, Inc., et al.

M. Pierce Sandwith, Attorney at Law.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 3rd of February 2017 by Plaintiffs 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 17th of August 2017."
**Exhibit 32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**EXCHANGE
      ACT RULE 15d-14(b) AND**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Eternal Energy Corp.
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30,
      2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Bradley M. Colby, President, Chief Executive Officer,
      Treasurer, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
      to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Exchange Act
      Rule 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:





i.  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
      document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
      that
      appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
      required by Section 906, has been provided to Eternal Energy Corp. and will
      be retained by Eternal Energy Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.





/s/Bradley
                M. ColbyBradley
                M. Colby*President,
                Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer,**Secretary
                and Chief Financial Officer**Eternal
                Energy Corp.*January
                18, 2007
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Stephen Anthony Sosa, Jr., * From the 35th District Court

of Brown County,

Trial Court No. CR26271

Vs. No. 11-22-00212-CR * June 8, 2023

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Williams, J.

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Trotter, J., and Williams, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no 

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
**Exhibit 32**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Netlist, Inc., aDelaware corporation (“Netlist”) for the quarter ended July 3, 2010 (the “Report”),Chun K. Hong, president, chief executive officer and chairman of the board ofNetlist, and Gail M. Sasaki, vice president and chief financial officer ofNetlist, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,to his or her knowledge:

 

(1)           the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(2)           the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Netlist, Inc.

 
| August 12,  2010 | /s/  Chun K. Hong                                             |
|-----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|
|                  | Chun  K. Hong                                                 |
|                  | President,  Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board |
|                  | (Principal  Executive Officer)                                |
|                  |                                                          |
|                  |                                                          |
| August 12,  2010 | /s/  Gail M. Sasaki                                           |
|                  | Gail  M. Sasaki                                               |
|                  | Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer                   |
|                  | (Principal  Financial Officer)                                |

 

----
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4468 

To require career and technical education for maritime careers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 10, 2014 

Ms. CASTOR of Florida (for herself and Mr. HUNTER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To require career and technical education for maritime 

careers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Seafarers Educational 

5 Advancement Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION LEADING TO 

7 MARITIME CAREERS. 

8 Section 135(b) of the Carl D. Perkins Career and 

9 Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2355(b)) is 

10 amended— 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 4468 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (8), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

2 end; 

3 (2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at 

4 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following new 

6 paragraph: 

7 ‘‘(10) provide career and technical education at 

8 the secondary level that leads to maritime careers, 

9 including a career in marine construction, commer10 cial diving and marine salvaging, container sales, 

11 dredging, environmental, marine, or ship engineer12 ing, marine and science research, maritime tech13 nology, stevedoring, ship repair, trucking and towing 

14 and tug services, admiralty or maritime legal serv15 ices, the cruise industry, as a member of a ship crew 

16 (such as a captain, mate, seaman, or engineer), or 

17 as a member of the Navy or Coast Guard.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Nathaniel R. WEBB v. NORTH CAROLINA OFFICE OF INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES, et al.

No. 104P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 17, 2018

Nathaniel R. Webb, for Webb, Nathaniel R.

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, for N.C. Office of Indigent Defense Services, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 5th of April 2018 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, N.C. Industrial Commission County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of April 2018."
Exhibit 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Third Century Bancorp on Form 10-QSBF
for the period  ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission  on the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Debra K.  Harlow,  Chief
Financial Officer of Third Century Bancorp,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

(1)  The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Third Century
     Bancorp.




/s/ Debra K. Harlow
-------------------------------
Debra K. Harlow
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
August 13, 2004


The foregoing  certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 and is not being filed for any other purpose.
STATE of North Carolina v. Robert Gregory BROWN

No. COA17-818

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: February 6, 2018

NO ERROR IN PART. REMANDED IN PART.