alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**489 KA 12-01772** 
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SHAWN A. MCNEW, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

KATHLEEN E. CASEY, BARKER, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL J. VIOLANTE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LOCKPORT (THOMAS H. BRANDT OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Niagara County Court (Matthew J. Murphy, III, J.), rendered July 9, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.50 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, his waiver of the right to appeal was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered ( see People v Lopez , 6 NY3d 248, 256; People v Pratt , 77 AD3d 1337, 1337, lv denied 15 NY3d 955). The valid waiver by defendant of the right to appeal encompasses his challenge to County Court’s suppression ruling ( see People v Kemp , 94 NY2d 831, 833; People v Rodriguez , 111 AD3d 1310, 1310), and the severity of the sentence ( see Lopez , 6 NY3d at 255-256). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, we conclude that his guilty plea was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently entered. Defendant’s assertions that he did not have sufficient time to consider the plea offer and that he was coerced into taking the plea because he believed that the People would pursue charges against his son are belied by his statements during the plea colloquy ( see People v Allen , 99 AD3d 1252, 1252). In addition, we note that “ ‘a plea agreement is not inherently coercive or invalid simply because it affords a benefit to a loved one, as long as the plea itself is knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently made’ ” ( People v Capoccetta , 60 AD3d 1382, 1382, lv denied 13 NY3d 858). Finally, we note that the certificate of conviction incorrectly recites that defendant was convicted of attempted criminal sexual act under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 130.50 (1), and it must therefore be amended to reflect that he was convicted under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 130.50 (2) ( see generally People v**-2- 489 KA 12-01772** 

Saxton , 32 AD3d 1286, 1286-1287).

Entered: May 2, 2014 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Case 1:06-cv-14987-AKH Document 3 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense POW/MIA Accounting AgencyFulfilling Our Nation's Promise

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Home		 
-  Families		 
-  Our Missing    -  Searchable List of the Missing             
  -  Searchable Map of the Missing             
  -  Recently Accounted For             
  -  World War II      -  World War II Summary             
    -  Battle of Tarawa             
    -  Attack on Pearl Harbor 
  -  Korean War      -  Korean War Summary             
    -  Battle of Chosin Reservoir             
    -  Battle of Unsan             
    -  Korean Air Battles             
    -  The Inchon Campaign             
    -  The Pusan Perimeter             
    -  The DMZ Campaigns             
    -  Korean War Disinterments             
    -  Operation Glory             
    -  POW Camps 
  -  Vietnam War      -  Vietnam War Summary             
    -  Vietnam War Identification Project             
    -  Tet Offensive             
    -  Battle of Khe Sanh             
    -  Mayaguez Incident             
    -  Battle of Ia Drang             
    -  Lam Son 
  -  Cold War             
  -  Gulf Wars & Libya             
  -  Unknowns 
-  News & Stories    -  Our Stories             
  -  Press Releases             
  -  DPAA In The News             
  -  Year In Review 
-  Multimedia    -  Livestreams             
  -  Podcast             
  -  Briefing Videos             
  -  Science Videos             
  -  DPAA Laboratory             
  -  Media Gallery 
-  Resources    -  FAQs             
  -  AFMES DNA Laboratory             
  -  Publicly Released Documents             
  -  Family/VSO Update Notes             
  -  Family Member Guide             
  -  POW/MIA Day Toolkit             
  -  USRJC 
-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Vision-Mission-Values             
  -  DPAA Organizational Chart 
-  Contact    -  Contact Us             
  -  Join Us      -  Careers 
  -  Report a Site             
  -  Donate to the Mission 
-  Volunteer		 

## News Release

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

PHOTO INFORMATION

** Download

** Details

** Share

# USS West Virginia Sailor Accounted For From World War II (Garcia, C.)

**                    SHARE                

**                    PRINT
#### PATRICK RANDOLPH FLACK and LOIS ELAINE FLACK, by and through their guardian ad litem, Lois R. Flack Garriss v. MARCUS A. GARRISS, BIANCA M. BROWN, GILBERT W. CHICHESTER, CMC FINANCE GROUP, INC.

No. 523A82

(Filed 11 January 1983)

Appeal and Error § 46— equally divided Court — decision affirmed — no precedent

Where one member of the Supreme Court did not participate in the consideration or decision of a case and the remaining six Justices are equally divided, the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed and stands without precedential value.

Justice Martin took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Appeal of right by the plaintiffs pursuant to G.S. 7A-30(2) from a decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 58 N.C. App. 573, 293 S.E. 2d 827 (1982), finding no error in the trial of this case.

*Josey, Josey, Hanudel and Jordan, by V Thomas Jordan, Jr., for plaintiff-appellants.*

*Perry, Kittrell Blackburn and Blackburn, by George T. Blackburn, II, for defendant-appellees.*

PER CURIAM.

Justice Martin took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. The remaining members of this Court being equally divided, with three members voting to affirm the Court of Appeals and three members voting to reverse, the decision of the Court of Appeals is left undisturbed and stands without precedential value. *See State v. Johnson,*286 N.C. 331, 210 S.E. 2d 260 (1974).

Affirmed.

*459Justice Martin took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 1 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 2 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 3 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 4 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 5 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 6 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 7 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 8 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 9 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 10 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 11 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 12 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 13 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 14 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 15 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 16 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 17 of 18
Case 1:07-cv-03312-PAC Document 6 Filed 08/31/2007 Page 18 of 18
UMBRALES JURISDICCIONALES

ORDEN EJECUTIVA 11246

SUMINISTRO Y SERVICIO

Cobertura básica

Cualquier

cantidad de 

empleados

+Contratos por 

más de

$10 000

Cobertura de AAP

50

o más

empleados

+

Un contrato

por $50 000 

o más

CONSTRUCCIÓN

Cobertura básica

Cualquier

cantidad de 

empleados

+Contratos por 

más de

$10 000

16 ESPECIFICACIONES

Cualquier

cantidad de 

empleados

+

Contratos por 

más de

$10 000

SECCIÓN 503

SUMINISTRO Y SERVICIO

Cobertura básica

Cualquier

cantidad de 

+

empleados

Un contrato 

por más 

de $15 000

Cobertura de AAP

50

o más

empleados

+

Un contrato

por $50 000 

o más

CONSTRUCCIÓN

Cobertura básica

Cualquier

cantidad de 

+

empleados

Un contrato

por más

de $15 000

Cobertura de AAP

o más

50

empleados

+

Un contrato

por $50 000 

o más

VEVRAA

SUMINISTRO Y SERVICIO

Cobertura básica

Cualquier

cantidad de 

+

empleados

Un contrato

por $150 000 

o más

Cobertura de AAP

o más

50

empleados

+

Un contrato

por $150 000 

o más

CONSTRUCCIÓN

Cobertura básica

Cualquier

cantidad de 

+

empleados

Un contrato

por $150 000 

o más

Cobertura de AAP

o más

50

empleados

+

Un contrato

por $150 000 

o más

Tenga en cuenta que los requisitos de la cobertura de la Sección 503 y de la Ley de Asistencia para el Reajuste de los Veteranos de Vietnam (Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act, VEVRAA) no se aplican a los contratistas del sector de la 

construcción con asistencia federal. Además, tanto la Sección 503 como la VEVRAA están sujetas a las normas federales 

que ajustan determinados umbrales en dólares relacionados con el requerimiento por motivos inflacionarios.

Tenga en cuenta que esta hoja solo brinda información general. No tiene por objetivo 

reemplazar las leyes y reglamentaciones vigentes sobre el programa que se describe en este documento.

Si tiene más preguntas sobre los umbrales jurisdiccionales, 

llámenos al 1-800-397-6251, TTY 1-877-889-5627.

OFFICE OF FEDERAL CONTRACT

COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS

U.S. Department of Labor enero de 2016
**EXHIBIT 23.  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:

(1)    Form S-3 Registration Statement No.   33-25880(2)     Form S-8 Registration Statement No.   33-53849(3)     Form S-8 Registration Statement No.   33-57211(4)     Form S-8 Registration Statement No.   33-59621(5)     Form S-8 Registration Statement No.  333-79129(6)     Form S-8 Registration Statement No.  333-79137(7)     Form S-8 Registration Statement No.  333-100923

of our reports dated March 15, 2005, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Intergraph Corporation, Intergraph Corporation's management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Intergraph Corporation, included in the 2004 Annual Report to Shareholders of Intergraph Corporation.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Birmingham, AlabamaMarch 15, 2005
#### LASSITER v. LASSITER

No. 30 PC.

Case below: 15 N.C. App. 588.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 3 October 1972.
Exhibit 32.2 KINDER MORGAN, INC. 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 on Form 10-Q of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 operations of the Company.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Kinder Morgan, Inc. and will be retained by Kinder Morgan, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.   Dated:  May 9, 2007/s/ Kimberly A. DangKimberly A. Dang
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:07-cv-03241-RJH-MHD     Document 34      Filed 02/20/2008     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-03241-RJH-MHD     Document 34      Filed 02/20/2008     Page 2 of 2
paa202110-kexhibit1012






Exhibit 10.12  FIRST AMENDMENT TO  THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED  EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT    This First Amendment dated effective December 31, 2021 (“Amendment No. 1”) to the  Third Amended and Restated Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”), effective January 1,  2020, is by and between Plains All American GP LLC (the “Company”) and Greg L. Armstrong  (“Armstrong” or the “Employee”). Capitalized terms that are used but not defined in this  Amendment No. 1 shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.     WITNESSETH    WHEREAS, Armstrong and the Company are parties to the Agreement, which was  entered into effective as of January 1, 2020;     WHEREAS, the Agreement provides that the term of Mr. Armstrong’s employment shall  terminate on December 31, 2021, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of the  Agreement;     WHEREAS, Mr. Armstrong was elected at the 2021 Annual Meeting to serve as a  director of PAA GP Holdings LLC for a three-year term ending on the date of the 2024 Annual  Meeting;    WHEREAS, the Board has approved an extension of the term of Mr. Armstrong’s  employment until the date of the 2024 Annual Meeting; and    WHEREAS, the Company and Armstrong desire to amend the Agreement by entering  into this Amendment No. 1, which sets forth their mutual agreement and understanding related to  the continued employment of Armstrong and certain related matters as set forth herein.    NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions herein contained,  the Parties agree as follows:    1. Section 1.  As amended, Section 2 of the Agreement shall read in full as follows:    “Term. The term of Armstrong’s employment with the Company as provided  hereunder (the “Term”) shall commence on the Effective Date (as defined in the  Agreement) and terminate on the date of the 2024 Annual Meeting; provided,  however, that (a) Armstrong may terminate his employment with the Company as of  any date prior to the date of the 2024 Annual Meeting by giving written notice to the  Company at least two weeks prior to the effective date of such termination, (b) at the  direction of the Board, the Company may terminate Armstrong’s employment with the  Company as of any date prior to the date of the 2024 Annual Meeting by giving  written notice to Armstrong at least two weeks prior to the effective date of such  termination, and (c) Armstrong’s employment relationship with the Company shall  automatically terminate in the event of his death. The date as of which the  





 






2    employment relationship terminates shall constitute the “Termination Date” for  purposes hereof.”      2. Section 2.  Except as hereby amended, the Agreement shall remain in full force and  effect.       





 






3    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment No. 1 effective as  of December 31, 2021.           /s/ Greg L. Armstrong      Greg L. Armstrong        PLAINS ALL AMERICAN GP LLC      By:  /s/ Richard McGee      Richard McGee   Executive Vice President
#### STATE v. HERRING

No. 72 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 277.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 May 1978.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF ASSETS, LIABILITIES AND TRUST CORPUS OF SAN
JUAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998, AND THE RELATED CONDENSED
STATEMENTS OF DISTRIBUTABLE INCOME AND CHANGES IN TRUST CORPUS FOR THE TWELVE
MONTH PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,665,562
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,665,562
<PP&E>                                     133,275,528
<DEPRECIATION>                              82,187,508
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              53,753,582
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,665,562
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  51,088,020
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                53,753,582
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            30,386,508
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               788,106
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             29,598,402
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         29,598,402
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                29,598,402
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### HARTLEY v. BALLOU

No. 21 PC.

Case below: 20 N.C. App. 493.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 2 April 1974.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

------------------------------------------------------------------------x 

KEVIN DAMION CRICHLOW, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

THE CITY OF NEW YORK, MARTIN F. HORN, in his 

individual and official capacity as Commissioner of the 

New York City Department of Corrections, MICHAEL 

HOURIHANE in his individual and official capacity as 

Warden of the Otis Bantum Correctional Center, ROBERT 

SHAW, in his individual and official capacity as Warden of

the George R. Vierno Center, SANDRA LANGSTON, in 

her individual and official capacity as Warden of the Eric 

M. Taylor Center, JOANDREA DAVIS, in her individual 

and official capacity as Warden of the Eric M. Taylor 

Center, 

Defendants.

------------------------------------------------------------------------x 

NOTICE OF 

APPEARANCE 

07 CV 3222 (RPP) 

PLEASE enter the appearance of the undersigned, as attorney to be noticed, on 

behalf of defendants THE CITY OF NEW YORK; MARTIN F. HORN, in his individual and 

official capacity as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Corrections; MICHAEL 

HOURIHANE, in his individual and official capacity as Warden of the Otis Bantum Correctional 

Center; ROBERT SHAW, in his individual and official capacity as Warden of the George R. 

Vierno Center; SANDRA LANGSTON, in her individual and official capacity as Warden of the 

Eric M. Taylor Center; and JOANDREA DAVIS, in her individual and official capacity as 

Case 1:07-cv-03222-RPP Document 38 Filed 05/15/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03222-RPP Document 38 Filed 05/15/2008 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                      43,902,567
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,689,085
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            52,094,215
<PP&E>                                      26,804,350
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,078,871
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              80,166,838
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,592,972
<BONDS>                                     33,057,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       228,466
<OTHER-SE>                                  67,556,328
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                80,166,838
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               642,531
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,389,232
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             455,476
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,202,177)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,202,177)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,202,177)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:06-cv-15015-AKH Document 5 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
Order entered February 14, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00114-CV

IN RE JAMES T. DANIEL AND KRISTI A. DANIEL, Relators

Original Proceeding from the 380th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-52305-2021

ORDER

Before Justices Molberg, Pedersen, III, and Garcia

Before the Court is relators’ February 11, 2022 petition for writ of 

mandamus in which they challenge the trial court’s temporary order changing the 

conservator with the exclusive right to determine the children’s primary residence.

We request that real party in interest and respondent file a response, if any, 

to the petition for writ of mandamus by February 18, 2022. 

/s/ BILL PEDERSEN, III

JUSTICE