alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. ALFRED CREWS

No. 729SC774

(Filed 20 December 1972)

Criminal Law § 113— evidence on defense of coercion — failure to give instructions — prejudicial error

In a kidnapping and felonious assault case where defendant offered evidence that his only participation in the event was in driving the car and that he was forced at gunpoint by the other two men involved to do that, the trial court erred in its jury charge by not instructing on defendant’s defense of coercion.

Appeal by defendant from *Godwin, Special Judge,*24 April 1972 Criminal Session of Franklin County Superior Court.

*142Defendant was tried on a proper bill of indictment charging him with the offenses of kidnapping and felonious assault upon Robert Hodge on 13 October 1970.

The defendant was found not guilty of the charge of felonious assault but was found guilty of the charge of kidnapping, and from a judgment of imprisonment, he appealed.

*Attorney General Robert Morgan by Assistant Attorney General Raff or d E. Jones for the State.*

*Hubert H. Senter for defendant appellant.*

CAMPBELL, Judge.

The evidence on behalf of the defendant tended to show that his only participation in the event was in driving the car and that he was forced at gunpoint by the other two men involved to do that and that this automobile ride to a secluded spot where Robert Hodge was beaten was not only against the will of Hodge but also was against the defendant’s will and only because of the coercion imposed upon the defendant by the other two men.

Nowhere in the court’s charge to the jury did the court instruct on defendant’s defense that he was coerced at gunpoint into participating in the kidnapping. The defendant offered evidence on this point.

The defendant was entitled to have the court instruct the jury to the effect that if, upon a consideration of all the evidence it found the facts to be that what the defendant did in driving the automobile was under compulsion or through fear of death or great bodily harm, it should return a verdict of not guilty. *State v. Sherian,*234 N.C. 30, 65 S.E. 2d 331 (1951).

We do not think the charge given was adequate in this respect.

The defendant is entitled to a new trial, and it is so ordered.

New trial.

Judges Brock and Graham concur.
#### David MAHONE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Florida Division of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 71-3277

Summary Calendar.**

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 13, 1972.

Before WISDOM, GODBOLD and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

**

 Rule 18, 5th Cir.; see Isbell Enterprises, Citizens Casualty Company of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed.1 See Local Rule 21.2

1

. The grounds upon which the appellant challenges the validity of his state murder conviction are: (1) evidence concerning the petitioner’s character was improperly admitted ; (2) he was deprived of an opportunity to impeach the only eyewitness by use of a prior inconsistent statement; (3) he was denied pretrial discovery of the arrest report, the police record and the F.B.I. record.

2

. See N.L.R.B. v. Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, 5 Cir., 1970, 430 F.2d 966.
United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

J.T., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, BUREAU OF 

ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS &

EXPLOSIVES, Syracuse, NY, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-0959

Issued: July 26, 2021

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

On June 10, 2021 appellant filed an appeal from a September 4, 2020 merit decision of the 

Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). The Clerk of the Appellate Boards

assigned Docket No. 21-0959.

The Board has duly considered the matter and notes that the Board has jurisdiction to 

review final adverse decisions of OWCP issued under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act.1 

For final adverse decisions of OWCP issued on or after November 19, 2008, the Board’s review 

authority is limited to appeals which are filed within 180 days from the date of issuance of OWCP’s 

decision.2

The 180th day following the September 4, 2020 decision was March 3, 2021. As appellant 

did not file an appeal with the Board until June 10, 2021, more than 180 days after the September 4,

2020 OWCP decision, the Board finds that the appeal docketed as No. 21-0959 is untimely filed. 

The Board is without jurisdiction to review the appeal. Appellant has not offered a reason to 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8149; 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3(a) (2009).

2

Id. at § 501.3(e).
2

explain the failure to timely file an appeal with supporting documentation sufficient to establish 

compelling circumstances.

The Board’s decisions and orders are “final upon the expiration of 30 days from the date 

of their issuance.”

3

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the appeal docketed as No. 21-0959 is dismissed.

Issued: July 26, 2021

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

 

3

Id. at § 501.6(d).
CONSULTING AGREEMENT



Exhibit 10.15


 

AMENDMENT TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT


 

 

THIS AMENDMENT TO CONSULTING AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into this 28th day of January 2002, by and between ST. CHARLES COMMUNITY, LLC (the "Company") and Thomas J. Shafer (the "Consultant").


WHEREAS, the Company and the Consultant entered into the original Consulting Agreement ("Original Agreement) on the 1st day of January 1998.


WHEREAS, Section II entitled "Compensation" of said Original Agreement is hereby amended to provide as follows:


The Consultant will be paid $4,000 per month for these services, payable semi-monthly, effective January 1, 2002.


WHEREAS, all other terms and conditions shall remain as stated in the Original Agreement.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first set forth above.


 

	
WITNESS
	 	
ST. CHARLES COMMUNITY, LLC

	 	 	 
	
/s/ Cynthia L. Hedrick
	 	
/s/ Edwin L. Kelly

	 	 	
Its:  Chairman

	 	 	
Date:  February 5, 2002

	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	
/s/ Cynthia L. Hedrick
	 	
/s/ Thomas J. Shafer

	 	 	
Thomas J. Shafer

	 	 	
Date:  February 5, 2002
<PAGE>
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.11.1

                  CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

         Pursuant to Section 7.5 of the Employment Agreement dated as of August
10, 2000, between Heritage Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation ("Heritage"),
and the undersigned (the "Employee"), the undersigned Employee does hereby
consent and agree to (i) the assignment of said Employment Agreement by Heritage
to U.S. Propane, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("U.S. Propane"), and U.S.
Propane's assumption of the duties and responsibilities of Heritage arising
under said Employment Agreement.

         DATED as of February 3, 2002.



                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Bradley K. Atkinson
#### CHARLES STEELE, Petitioner, v. THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, in and for Carson City, and THE HONORABLE MICHAEL R. GRIFFIN, District Judge, Respondent.

No. 22774

May 13, 1992

830 P.2d 1340

*Martillaro and Martillaro,*Carson City, for Petitioner.

*Noel Waters,*District Attorney, Carson City, for Respondent.

*353OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

This petition for a writ of certiorari challenges petitioner’s conviction of one count of destruction of personal property (a misdemeanor) in district court, following acquittal of that charge in municipal court.1

On November 2, 1989, the state filed in the Carson City Municipal Court a criminal complaint charging petitioner with one count each of battery and destruction of personal property. CCMC 8.04.030, 8.04.045. On May 23, 1990, the municipal court conducted a trial on those charges. The municipal court convicted petitioner of the charge of battery, and acquitted petitioner of the charge of destruction of personal property.

Petitioner appealed to the district court. The notice of appeal specifies that the appeal is from a judgment of conviction for violating CCMC 8.04.030, battery. The district court, following a trial de novo, acquitted petitioner of the charge of battery, but convicted petitioner of destruction of personal property. This petition followed.

Petitioner contends that the district court violated the federal and state prohibitions of double jeopardy by convicting him of a crime for which he had already been acquitted in the municipal court. We agree. It is a well settled, fundamental principle that a verdict of acquittal may “not be reviewed, on error or otherwise, without putting [a defendant] twice in jeopardy.” United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co., 430 U.S. 564, 571 (1977) (quoting United States v. Ball, 163 U.S. 662, 671 (1896)). The Supreme Court has approved of a two-tier trial system for minor offenses, like the one in Nevada, only on the express condition that it not provide for a second trial after an acquittal. Justices of Boston Municipal Court v. Lydon, 466 U.S. 294, 305-07 (1984); Ludwig v. Massachusetts, 427 U.S. 618, 631 (1976).

*354The state argues that petitioner waived the right to raise a double jeopardy defense by filing an appeal. This contention lacks merit. Petitioner did not appeal from his acquittal, nor could he have appealed therefrom. Petitioner’s appeal went only to his judgment of conviction.

We conclude that the district court exceeded its jurisdiction in convicting petitioner of the crime of destruction of personal property. Further, there is no direct appeal available, and no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law. *See*NRS 34.020(2); City of Las Vegas v. Carver, 92 Nev. 198, 547 P.2d 688 (1976). Accordingly, we grant this petition.

The clerk of this court shall forthwith issue a writ of certiorari to the district court, ordering the district court to vacate its judgment of conviction against petitioner for destruction of personal property.

1

 "Destruction of personal property” was the language used below. CCMC 8.04.045 refers to “injury to property of another.”
```

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 26, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 61833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21398]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CO-134-1610-DQ]

Notice of Extension of the Call for Nominations for the McInnis 
Canyons National Conservation Area (NCA) Advisory Council

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is extending the call for 
nominations for ten membership positions on the McInnis Canyons 
National Conservation Area Advisory Council. The original notice 
calling for nominations published in the Federal Register on September 
14, 2005 [70 FR 54403]. The original deadline for the call for 
nominations was October 14, 2005. The purpose of this notice is to 
extend the nomination period until October 31, 2005. The Council 
advises the Secretary and the BLM on resource management issues 
associated with the McInnis Canyons NCA and Black Ridge Canyons 
Wilderness.

DATES: Submit a completed nomination form and nomination letters to the 
address listed below no later than October 31, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send completed nominations to: McInnis Canyons NCA Manager, 
Grand Junction Field Office, Bureau of Land Management, 2815 H Road, 
Grand Junction, CO 81506.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maggie Langlas, Program Analyst NLCS, 
(202) 491-9725, [email protected].

    Dated: October 17, 2005.
Holly Hampton,
Acting Group Manager, National Monuments and National Conservation 
Areas, National Landscape Conservation System.
[FR Doc. 05-21398 Filed 10-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-22-P
```
##### 



State or Other Jurisdiction ofSubsidiary
    
    Incorporation or OrganizationAmphion Semiconductor (Asia) Ltd.
    
    Northern IrelandAmphion Semiconductor, Ltd.
    
    Northern IrelandAmphion Semiconductor, Inc.
    
    CaliforniaBrooktree Broadband Holding, Inc.
    
    DelawareConexant Broadband Communications (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
    
    Peoples Republic of ChinaConexant Broadband (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd.
    
    Peoples Republic of ChinaConexant Canada ULC
    
    CanadaConexant Digital TV (Chengdu) Co., Ltd.
    
    Peoples Republic of ChinaConexant Foreign Sales Corporation
    
    BarbadosConexant, Inc.
    
    DelawareConexant Korea Ltd.
    
    KoreaConexant Mauritius Ltd.
    
    MauritiusConexant Systems Asia Pacific Limited
    
    Hong Kong, Peoples Republic of ChinaConexant Systems France S.A.S.
    
    FranceConexant Systems Germany G.m.b.H.
    
    GermanyConexant Systems Holdings Limited
    
    United KingdomConexant Systems Iceland Ltd.
    
    IcelandConexant Systems India Private Limited
    
    IndiaConexant Systems Israel (1996) Ltd.
    
    IsraelConexant Systems Israel Commercial Ltd.
    
    IsraelConexant Systems (Japan) Company Ltd.
    
    JapanConexant Systems Netherlands BV
    
    NetherlandsConexant Systems (Noida) Private Ltd.
    
    IndiaConexant Systems (PB) Private Ltd.
    
    IndiaConexant Systems Singapore Pte. Limited
    
    SingaporeConexant Systems (Taiwan) Co., Ltd.
    
    TaiwanConexant Systems UK Limited
    
    United KingdomConexant Systems Worldwide, Inc.
    
    DelawareConexant USA LLC
    
    DelawareFicon Technology, Inc.
    
    New JerseyGlobespan International Corporation
    
    DelawareNPS Holding, Inc.
    
    MassachusettsNetplane Systems International, LLC
    
    DelawarePaxonet Communications, Inc.
    
    DelawareTsqware, Inc.
    
    DelawareVirata Israel, Ltd.
    
    Israel
#### STERLING M. PRICE v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 45675.

Decided November 2, 1942]

*Mr. Sterling M. Price*pro se.

*Mr. Elihu*Schott, with whom was *Mr. Assistant Attorney Deneral Francis M.*Shea, for the defendant.

*383The facts sufficiently appear from the *per*as follows:

This case comes before the court on the defendant’s demurrer to the plaintiff’s petition, on the ground that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations, Section 156 of the Judicial Code, 36 Stat. 1139; Section 262, Title 28, U. S. C. 1940 ed., which provides that:

> Every claim against the United States cognizable by the Court of Claims shall be forever barred unless the petition setting forth a statement thereof is filed in the court * * * within six years after the claim first accrues * * *.

The plaintiff sues for services as a watchman of an automobile parking lot in the City of Denver, Colorado, from March 1, 1935, to September 12, 1935, the parking lot being under the direction and supervision of a custodian, who was also the Collector of Customs of the Port of Denver.

The petition herein was filed April 29,1942. The claim first accrued not later than September 12,1935, when services had been concluded, more than six years before the petition was filed.

The case' is barred by the statute cited. The defendant’s demurrer is sustained and the petition dismissed. It is so ordered.
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 Veterans Affairs

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Special Medical Advisory Group will meet on Wednesday, November 16, 2005. The meeting will be held in Room 830 at VA Central Office, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public.

The purpose of the Group is to advise the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the under Secretary for Health on the care and treatment of disabled veterans, and other matters pertinent to the Department's Veterans Health Administration. The agenda for the meeting will include discussions on VA's role in national disaster relief, national response to influenza pandemic, information technology reorganization, budget, and the impact of obesity and diabetes on the military and veterans populations.

Any member of the public wishing to attend should contact Ms. Juanita Leslie, Office of Administrative Operations (10B2), Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs at (202) 273-5882. No time will be set aside at this meeting for receiving oral presentations from the public. Statements, in written form, may be submitted to Juanita Leslie before the meeting or within 10 days after the meeting.

Dated: October 17, 2005.

By Direction of the Secretary.

E. Philip Riggin,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 05-21314 Filed 10-24-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 210 (Tuesday, November 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65911-65912]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21662]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Environmental Health 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel, Review of (R42s, R43s and R44s).
    Date: November 30, 2005.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Nat. Inst. of Environmental Health Sciences, Building 
101, Rodbell Auditorium, 111 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27709.
    Contact Person: Sally Eckert-Tilotta, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Inst. of Environmental Health Sciences, 
Office of Program Operations, Scientific Review Branch, P.O. Box 
12233, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 919/541-1446, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c8adaba3adbabcbcf988a6a1ada0bbe6a6a1a0e6afa7be"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="adc8cec6c8dfd9d99cedc3c4c8c5de83c3c4c583cac2db">[email protected]</span></a>.


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.115, 
Biometry and Risk Estimation--Health Risks from Environmental 
Exposures; 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker Health and Safety 
Training; 93.143, NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances--Basic 
Research and Education; 93.894, Resources and Manpower Development 
in the Environmental Health Sciences; 93.113, Biological Response to 
Environmental Health Hazards; 93.114, Applied Toxicological Research 
and Testing, National Institutes of Health, HHS)


[[Page 65912]]


    Dated: October 20, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-21662 Filed 10-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<PAGE>
											Exhibit 23




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors and Shareholders
  of The Advest Group, Inc.:


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements of The Advest Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 (File No. 2-
92868) concerning its 1983 Incentive Stock Option Plan, Form S-8 (File No. 33-
17674) concerning its 1986 Incentive Stock Option Plan; Form S-8 (File No. 33-
72042) concerning its Advest Thrift Plan; Form S-8 (File No. 33-56275)
concerning its 1995 Equity Plan, Form S-8 (File No. 333-00797) concerning its
Executive Officer 1996 Restricted Stock and Stock Option Agreement; Form S-8
(File No. 33-60425) concerning its 1990, 1991 and 1992 Top Account Executive
Stock Option Plans, its 1993 Stock Option Plan and its 1994 Non-Employee
Director Stock Option Plan; Form S-8 (File No. 333-17711) concerning Key
Professionals Equity Plan, 1996 Executive Equity Plan, 1997 Executive Equity
Plan and 1997 Equity Plan; Form S-3 (File No. 333-43053) and Form S-8 (File No.
333-82235) concerning its 1994 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan, Equity
Plan, Key Professionals Equity Plan, Non-Employee Director Equity Plan and
Thrift Plan, of our reports dated October 27, 1999, relating to the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedule, which appear in this Form
10-K.




						/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP



Hartford, Connecticut
December 15, 1999

                                     108
##### 



Certification required by Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15a-14(b) and Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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 the Trust.
 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., TRUSTEE
FOR
PERMIAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUSTDate: March 13, 2007
    By:
    /s/ Ron E. HooperRon E. Hooper,Senior Vice President,
     Royalty Management