alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
STATE of North Carolina v. Jamier Stevon HEARD

No. 351P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Michael T. Wood, Special Deputy Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Jamier Stevon Heard, for Heard, Jamier Stevon.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 15th of October 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th of October 2018 by Defendant to Deem Petition Timely Filed:

"Motion Dismissed as moot by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-10804

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff–Appellee,

v.

ALFRED BROOKS,

Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:98-CR-84-2

Before WIENER, PRADO, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

Alfred Brooks, federal prisoner # 30337-077, appeals the district court’s

denial of his “Petition for Reduction of Sentence under Informer: Quitan and

Popular Action in Accordance to 21 U.S.C. § 886(a), 28 U.S.C. § 994(n), 28 U.S.C.

§ 2501, and Rule 35(b).” He argues that the Government promised to file a

motion for a reduction of his sentence pursuant to Rule 35 of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure based on his substantial assistance in providing

information and testifying against another inmate.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

March 22, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 10-10804 Document: 00511419498 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/22/2011
No. 10-10804

Only the Government can file a motion for reduction of a defendant’s

sentence pursuant to Rule 35(b). United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 141 (5th

Cir. 1994) (per curiam). Brooks’s motion was “an unauthorized motion which the

district court was without jurisdiction to entertain.” See id. at 142. Brooks does

not argue that the Government’s refusal to file such a motion was based on an

unconstitutional motive. See, e.g., United States v. Grant, 493 F.3d 464, 467 (5th

Cir. 2007). He has also failed to show that the Government bargained away its

discretion concerning whether to file the motion. See United States v. Price, 95

F.3d 364, 368 & n.2 (5th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Accordingly, we affirm the

district court’s denial of Brooks’s motion. See Early, 27 F.3d at 142; see also

Brewster v. Dretke, 587 F.3d 764, 769 n.3 (5th Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct.

3368 (2010).

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 10-10804 Document: 00511419498 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/22/2011
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-2404EM

_____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Missouri. * Gerald Miner, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: January 18, 1999

Filed: January 28, 1999

_____________ Before FAGG, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. Gerald Miner appeals the district court's denial of Miner's motion for a new trial based on n ewly discovered evidence. Having considered the record and the parties ' briefs, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Miner' s motion without conducting an evidenti ary hearing. See United States v. Turk , 21 F.3d 309, 3 12 (8th Cir. 1994); United States v. LaFuente , 991 F.2d 1406, 1409 (8th Cir . 1993). Accordingly, we affirm. See8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
STATE of North Carolina v. Samuel Calleros ALVAREZ

No. 299A18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

December 5, 2018

Anne Bleyman, Attorney at Law, for Alvarez, Samuel Calleros.

Anne Goco Kirby, Assistant Attorney General, Matthew Delbridge, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition for discretionary review, filed by Defendant on the 11th of September 2018 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 and the Appellate Rule 16(b) as to issues in addition to those presented as the basis for the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the petition for discretionary review as to additional issues is

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th of December 2018."

Accordingly, only those issues which are the basis of the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals shall be presented to this Court in briefs. The Defendant's new brief so limited in scope shall be filed with this Court not more than 30 days from the date of certification of this order.
##### 



EXHIBIT 4.1 NUMBER
    

(MAKEMUSIC LOGO)
    
    SHARES
 MAKEMUSIC, INC.
INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA  SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS
CUSIP: 56086P 20 2
 THIS CERTIFIES THAT IS THE OWNER OF FULLY
PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF COMMON STOCK OF MAKEMUSIC, INC. TRANSFERABLE ON THE BOOKS OF THE CORPORATION BY THE HOLDER HEREOF IN
PERSON OR BY ATTORNEY UPON SURRENDER OF THIS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY ENDORSED.
THIS CERTIFICATE IS NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED BY THE TRANSFER
AGENT-REGISTRAR. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE SAID CORPORATION HAS CAUSED THIS CERTIFICATE TO BE
SIGNED BY FACSIMILE SIGNATURES OF ITS DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICERS. DATED: CORPORATE
SECRETARY

    
    
    
    CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERTRANSFER AGENT AND REGISTRARBYAUTHORIZED SIGNATURE




---



##### 



TEN COM
    
    -
    
    as tenants in commonTEN ENT
    
    -
    
    as tenants by entiretiesJT TEN
    
    -
    
    as joint tenants with right of survivorship
and not as tenants in common
 UTMA -
    
    
    
    Custodian(Cust)
    
    
    
    (Minor)under Uniform Transfer to MinorsAct(State)
    
 For value received hereby sell, assign and transfer unto


PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE

























Shares
of the capital stock represented by the within Certificate,
and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
Attorney
to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named
Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.







Dated


X
 X






ALL GUARANTEES MUST BE MADE BY A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION (SUCH
AS A BANK OR BROKER) WHICH IS A PARTICIPANT IN THE SECURITIES
TRANSFER AGENTS MEDALLION PROGRAM (STAMP), THE NEW YORK
STOCK EXCHANGE, INC. MEDALLION SIGNATURE PROGRAM (MSP), OR
THE STOCK EXCHANGES MEDALLION PROGRAM (SEMP) AND MUST NOT
BE DATED. GUARANTEES BY A NOTARY PUBLIC ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE.
[J-103-2014] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellee** 

**v.**

**LARRY FRANCIS WEAVER, Appellant**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **No. 13 MAP 2014 Appeal from the**  **Order of the Superior Court at Nos. 1870 and 1973 MDA 2012,**  **dated August 28, 2013, affirming the Judgment of Sentence of the Franklin**  **County Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division at No. CP-28-CR-0000516-2010,**  **dated June 13, 2012 ARGUED: November 19, 2014** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM DECIDED: December 1, 2014 AND NOW **, this 1st day of December, 2014, the order of the Sup erior Court is**  **hereby** AFFIRMED

**.**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the Exhaust
Technologies, Inc. Financial Statements and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<CASH>                                             352
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    108,545
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               108,897
<PP&E>                                          95,186
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 266,945
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          389,724
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            47
<OTHER-SE>                                   (122,779)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   266,945
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  180,330
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,718
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (189,048)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (189,041)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (189,048)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
##### 



NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
 pursuant to the
 CLEARWIRE CORPORATION
2007 STOCK COMPENSATION PLAN
 * * * * *
 Optionee:Grant Date:Vesting Date:Per Share Exercise Price:
 Number
of Option Shares subject to this Option:
  Agreement Company Optionee Plan
   Incorporation By Reference; Plan Document Receipt




---



##### 



Grant of Option Stock Option Option Shares
 No Dividend Equivalents
 Exercisability of this Stock Option
  Option Period
  Disability Disability Disability
 Method of Exercise and Payment . Exercise
Notice
 Termination of Service Relationship
 2




---



##### 



Non-transferability .
   3




---



##### 



Immediate
Family provided however
 Entire Agreement; Amendment provided however
 Notices
 General Counsel
  Governing Law
 Compliance with Laws
 4




---



##### 



Binding Agreement; Assignment
 Counterparts
 Headings
 Further Assurances
 Severability
  CLEARWIRE CORPORATIONBy:Benjamin G. WolffChief Executive OfficerOptioneePrinted Name
 5
STATE of North Carolina v. Scott David ALLEN

No. 115A04-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 25, 2019

Daniel P. O'Brien, Special Deputy Attorney General, Garland N. Yates, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Scott David Allen, for Allen, Scott David.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 22nd of March 2019 by Defendant for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 25th of March 2019."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 22nd of March 2019 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:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 25th of March 2019."
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Jack Wagenti, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of U. S. Precious
Metals, Inc.;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statements of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small
business issuer and have:

            (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

            (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

            (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonable likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

      5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

            (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

            (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.


Date: January 17, 2006.

/s/ Jack Wagenti
-----------------------
Jack Wagenti
(Secretary/Treasurer and CFO)
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4406 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4406

 To amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to 
           impose restrictions on the risk corridor program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 4, 2014

  Mr. Lance introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to 
           impose restrictions on the risk corridor program.

    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 ``Taxpayer Bailout Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. RESTRICTIONS ON PPACA RISK CORRIDOR PROGRAM.

    Section 1342(b) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
(42 U.S.C. 18062(b)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``The Secretary'' and 
        inserting ``Subject to paragraph (3), the Secretary''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) Safeguard to protect taxpayers.--
                    ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
                the amount of payments to plans under paragraph (1) for 
                a plan year beginning during calendar year 2014, 2015, 
                or 2016 does not exceed the amount of payments to the 
                Secretary under paragraph (2) for such plan year.
                    ``(B) Adjustment to protect taxpayers.--The 
                Secretary shall proportionately decrease the amount of 
                payments to plans under paragraph (1) in order to 
                ensure that the requirement of subparagraph (A) is 
                satisfied each year.''.
                                 <all>
```
STATE of North Carolina v. Ryan Quanterius BLUE

No. COA18-677

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: January 15, 2019

NO ERROR.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4861 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 450
111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4861

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 2010

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

                             June 29, 2010

              Reported by Mr. Lieberman, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1343 West Irving Park Road in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Steve 
                    Goodman Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. STEVE GOODMAN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1343 West Irving Park Road in Chicago, Illinois, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Steve Goodman Post Office Building''.
    (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 ``Steve 
Goodman Post Office Building''.
                                                       Calendar No. 450

111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4861

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1343 West Irving Park Road in Chicago, Illinois, as the ``Steve 
                    Goodman Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 29, 2010

                       Reported without amendment
```
# Official Journal C 144/31 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 144 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6531 March 2022 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 144

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6531 March 2022

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2022/C 144/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 February 2022 to 28 February 2022(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2022/C 144/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 February 2022 to 28 February 2022(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

1

---

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

EN
IO MOONWALKERS, INC., and American Coins & Gold, Inc., Plaintiffs v. BANC OF AMERICA MERCHANT SERVICES, LLC, Bank of America Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., and First Data Merchant Services, LLC, Defendants v. Rilwan Hassan, Third-Party Defendant

No. 120P18

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 7, 2018

Jon Ward, Adam L. White, Richard L. Pinto, Attorneys at Law, for IO Moonwalkers, Inc.

Harrison A. Lord, Attorney at Law, for Banc of America Merchant Services, LLC, et al.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 17th of April 2018 by Plaintiffs and Third-Party 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 7th of June 2018."
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v. 

TANYA MARIE MORREO, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

No. 16-50170 

D.C. No. 3:15-cr-02659-BEN 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Roger T. Benitez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 8, 2017**

Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Tanya Marie Morreo appeals from the district court’s judgment and 

challenges the 180-month sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction 

for importation of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960. We 

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

 

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

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

MAY 11 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 16-50170 

Morreo contends that the district court’s mitigating role analysis was legally 

flawed and resulted in the erroneous denial of her request for a minor role 

adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. We review the district court’s interpretation 

of the Guidelines de novo, and its application of the Guidelines to the facts for 

abuse of discretion. See United States v. Gasca-Ruiz, 852 F.3d 1167, 1170 (9th 

Cir. 2017) (en banc). Contrary to Morreo’s contention, the record demonstrates 

that the district court properly compared her to her co-participants in the offense 

and considered the factors enumerated in the Guideline and the totality of the 

circumstances to determine whether Morreo was “substantially less culpable than 

the average participant.” See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 cmt. n.3(A), (C); United States v. 

Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d 519, 523 (9th Cir. 2016); see also United States v. Carty, 

520 F.3d 984, 992 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc) (district judges are presumed to know 

the law and need not “tick off” all of the sentencing factors). Moreover, in light of 

the circumstances of the offense, the district court did not abuse its discretion in 

concluding that Morreo was not a minor participant. See Quintero-Leyva, 823 F.3d

at 523 (the court may consider factors other than those included in the commentary 

to the Guideline and may deny a reduction even if some of the factors support a 

contrary result).

AFFIRMED.