alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 20

- 00337

- CR

EX PARTE Abel MONTES

From the 2nd 25th Judicial District Court

, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 20

- 0995

- CR

- A

Honorable Jessica Crawford , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE RIOS, AND JUSTICE WATKINS

In accordance with this court’s memorandum opinion of this date, the trial court’s order denying Abel Montes’s amended habeas corpus application is REVERSED, and this case is

REMANDED to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. The clerk of this court is ORDERED to issue the mandate immediately. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 18.6 (allowing the appellate court to issue the mandate with its judgment in an accelerated appeal); Ex parte Carson , 215 S.W.3d 921, 924 (Tex. App

— Texarkana 2007, no pet.) (issuing the mandate immediately in an article 17.151 bail reduction case).

SIGNED February 17, 2021.

_____________________________ Irene Rios, Justice
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2193 

AN ACT 

To require the Administrator of General Services to issue 

guidance to clarify that Federal agencies may pay by 

charge card for the charging of Federal electric motor 

vehicles, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 2193 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Charging Helps Agen3 cies Realize General Efficiencies Act’’ or the ‘‘CHARGE 

4 Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. PAYMENT BY CHARGE CARD FOR CHARGING FED6 ERAL ELECTRIC MOTOR VEHICLES. 

7 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this Act— 

8 (1) the term ‘‘Administrator’’ means the Ad9 ministrator of General Services; 

10 (2) the term ‘‘charge card’’— 

11 (A) means a card, plate, coupon book, or 

12 other means existing for the purpose of obtain13 ing money, property, labor, or services; and 

14 (B) includes— 

15 (i) a card issued under the GSA 

16 SmartPay program; and 

17 (ii) a Fleet Services card; 

18 (3) the term ‘‘covered electric motor vehicle’’ 

19 means a passenger carrier that is— 

20 (A) a passenger motor vehicle; and 

21 (B) an electric motor vehicle; 

22 (4) the term ‘‘electric motor vehicle’’ has the 

23 meaning given the term in section 601 of the Energy 

24 Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13271); 

25 (5) the term ‘‘electric motor vehicle charging 

26 station’’ means a battery-charging station that per-
3 

†S 2193 ES

1 mits the transfer of electric energy (by conductive or 

2 inductive means) to a battery or other storage device 

3 in an electric motor vehicle; and 

4 (6) the terms ‘‘Federal agency’’ and ‘‘passenger 

5 carrier’’ have the meanings given those terms in sec6 tion 1344(h) of title 31, United States Code. 

7 (b) GUIDANCE.—Not later than 180 days after the 

8 date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall 

9 issue guidance to clarify that each Federal agency may, 

10 in accordance with section 1344 of title 31, United States 

11 Code— 

12 (1) charge a covered electric motor vehicle at a 

13 commercial electric motor vehicle charging station; 

14 and 

15 (2) pay for a transaction described in para16 graph (1) with a charge card. 

17 (c) ISSUANCE OF CHARGE CARDS.—Not later than 

18 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Ad19 ministrator shall issue to each Federal agency a charge 

20 card for each covered electric motor vehicle of the Federal 

21 agency that may be used by an officer or employee of the 

22 Federal agency to pay for charging the covered motor ve-
4 

†S 2193 ES

1 hicle in accordance with the guidance issued under sub2 section (b). 

Passed the Senate November 21, 2019. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2193 

AN ACT 

To require the Administrator of General Services to 

poses. eral electric motor vehicles, and for other purmay pay by charge card for the charging of Fedissue guidance to clarify that Federal agencies
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Florence M. Tappin, as Administratrix of the Estate of John F. Tappin, Deceased, Respondent, *v.*James C. Cropsey, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, Appellant.

*People ex rel. Tappin*v. *Cropsey,*178 App. Div. 180, affirmed.

(Argued May 28, 1918;

decided June 11, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered January 31, 1918, which sustained a writ of certiorari and annulled a determination of the police commissioner of the city of New York dismissing relator’s intestate, a police captain, from the police department of the city of New York. The decedent was charged with conduct unbecoming an officer and violation of the rules, tried upon said charges and dismissed. The Appellate Division annulled the determination of the police commissioner and ordered a new trial • on the ground that the trial commissioner had disqualified himself from acting in the matter because of remarks he had made to the relator’s decedent prior to the hearing itself in connection with a preliminary investigation.

*William P. Burr, Corporation Counsel (William B. Carswell*of counsel), for appellant.. .

*Harry Crone*and *Francis Gilbert*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.
# C_2011193EN.01001701.xml

| 2.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/17

---

Commission information notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 193/07

| Member State | France |
| --- | --- |
| Routes concerned | Rennes–Mulhouse
  Rennes–Toulouse |
| Date of entry into force of the public service obligations | Repeal |
| Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained | Arrêté du 6 juin 2011 relatif à l’abrogation des obligations de service public imposées sur les services aériens réguliers entre Rennes, d’une part, Mulhouse et Toulouse, d’autre part (Decree of 6 June 2011 repealing the public service obligations imposed on scheduled air services between Rennes and Mulhouse and Rennes and Toulouse)
  NOR: DEVA1115300A
  http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/initRechTexte.do
  For further information please contact:





  Direction générale de l’aviation civile |
| DTA/SDT/T2 |
| 50 rue Henry Farman |
| 75720 Paris Cedex 15 |
| FRANCE |
| Tel. +33 158094321 |
| E-mail: osp-compagnies.dta@aviation-civile.gouv.fr |

Member State

France

Routes concerned

Rennes–Mulhouse

Rennes–Toulouse

Date of entry into force of the public service obligations

Repeal

Address where the text and any relevant information and/or documentation relating to the public service obligation can be obtained

Arrêté du 6 juin 2011 relatif à l’abrogation des obligations de service public imposées sur les services aériens réguliers entre Rennes, d’une part, Mulhouse et Toulouse, d’autre part (Decree of 6 June 2011 repealing the public service obligations imposed on scheduled air services between Rennes and Mulhouse and Rennes and Toulouse)

NOR: DEVA1115300A

http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/initRechTexte.do

For further information please contact:

Direction générale de l’aviation civile

DTA/SDT/T2

50 rue Henry Farman

75720 Paris Cedex 15

FRANCE

Tel. +33 158094321

E-mail: osp-compagnies.dta@aviation-civile.gouv.fr

---
Exhibit 32.1





CEO 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 Quadra Projects Inc. a Nevada corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended August 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Wang Zheng, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Director of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, 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 result of operations of the Company.








/s/ Wang ZhengWang ZhengPrincipal Executive OfficerDate: November 15, 2011
**Exhibit 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

Intersil Corporation: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statements on Form S-4 (Nos. 333-35052 and 333-46984) and Form S-8 (Nos. 333-117890, 333-88208, 333-31094, 333-50718, 333-50722 and 333-65804) of Intersil Corporation and subsidiaries of our reports dated February 26, 2007, withrespect to the consolidated balance sheet of Intersil Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 29, 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity, comprehensive income and cash flows for the year endedDecember 29, 2006, and the related financial statement schedule, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 29, 2006, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting as of December 29, 2006, which reports appear in the December 29, 2006, annual report on Form 10-K of Intersil Corporation and subsidiaries. 

Our report with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Intersil Corporation and subsidiaries refers to Intersil Corporation and subsidiaries’ adoption of the provisions of Statement of FinancialAccounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123R, *Share Based Payment*, as of December 31, 2005. 

KPMG LLP 

Orlando, Florida 

February 26, 2007 

Certified Public Accountants
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

April 12, 2024

SC-2024-0090

Ex parte David Otto Jacobson PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI 

TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: David Otto Jacobson 

v. State of Alabama) (Etowah Circuit Court: CV-23-92; Criminal Appeals: 

CR-2023-0984).

CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT

WHEREAS, the petition for writ of certiorari in the above 

referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the 

Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was 

entered in this cause on April 12, 2024:

Writ Denied. No Opinion. Stewart, J. -- Parker, C.J., and Wise, 

Sellers, and Cook, JJ., concur.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified 

on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered 

by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are 

hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness 

my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

,

v.

PHILLIP ANDREW FRIAS

,

A ppelle e

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§

'

' No. 08

- 1 4

- 00014

- CR

Appeal from the

171 st District Court

of El Paso County , Texas

(TC# 20130D03266 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellee ’s third motion for extension of time to file the brief until

Jun e 5

, 201 5

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE

APPELLEE ’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Robin Norris , the Appellee ’s Attorney, prepare the

Appellee ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before June 5 , 201 5

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 30 th day of April , 201 5

.

PER CURIAM

B efore M cClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR
THE SIX MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           7,121
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  143,306
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,998
<INVENTORY>                                    155,355
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               317,238
<PP&E>                                         390,535
<DEPRECIATION>                                 216,158
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 538,346
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           82,055
<BONDS>                                         28,575
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        50,408
<OTHER-SE>                                     367,172
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   538,346
<SALES>                                        544,670
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               544,670
<CGS>                                          379,119
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  379,119
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,515
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 78,583
<INCOME-TAX>                                    30,032
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             48,551
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    48,551
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.15
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cv-03560-LAK Document 21 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03560-LAK Document 21 Filed 07/27/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE v. REIVES

No. 117 PC.

Case below: 29 N.C. App. 11.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 3 May 1976.
#### STATE v. VEHAUN

No. 37 PC.

Case below: 34 N.C. App. 700.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          23,019
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  107,819
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,516
<INVENTORY>                                    159,627
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               304,818
<PP&E>                                         334,110
<DEPRECIATION>                                 185,604
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 477,781
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           75,719
<BONDS>                                         30,685
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        43,539
<OTHER-SE>                                     317,446
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   477,781
<SALES>                                        696,082
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               696,082
<CGS>                                          478,290
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  478,290
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,941
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                104,478
<INCOME-TAX>                                    39,791
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             64,687
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    64,687
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.3
 GRACECHURCH RECEIVABLES TRUSTEE LIMITED
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on
Form 6-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect
of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Gracechurch Receivables Trustee Limited;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, does not contain any untrue statement 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 as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these
reports is included in these reports;4.
    
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and
based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required
under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and5.
    
    The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicers compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon
the report provided by an independent public accountant, after
conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement.
 By:
    
    /s/ Jonathon William AlbrightName:
    
    Jonathon William AlbrightTitle:
    
    DirectorDate:
    
    June 27, 2007
 -28-
#### BEAMAN v. SHEPPARD

No. 45 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 73.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 7 March 1978.
#### RUPERT FRANKLIN SCARLETT, Administrator of the Estate of LARRY NELSON SCARLETT Deceased v. WILLIAM LaFAYETTE ABERNETHY, HOUSTON DONNELL HAVNAER, and ABERNETHY’S, INCORPORATED. and EDNA WRENN SCARLETT, Administratrix of the Estate of RUSSELL WAYNE SCARLETT, Deceased v. WILLIAM LaFAYETTE ABERNETHY, HOUSTON DONNELL HAVNAER, and ABERNETHY’S, INCORPORATED.

(Filed 25 March 1964.)

Appeal by defendants from *Farthing, J.,*Regular September 1963 Session, Catawba Superior Court.

Civil actions to recover damages for the alleged wrongful deaths of plaintiffs’ intestates who were instantly killed in a three vehicle, rear-end collision on Highway 64-70 near Conover on the night of February 23, 1961. Twice heretofore this Court has reviewed cases growing out of the same accident. They are reported in 256 N.C. 677 and 258 N.C. 114. The plaintiffs’ evidence in the present actions, which were consolidated for trial, was not essentially different from that recited in the former appeals.

The driver of the defendants’ station wagon testified he stopped at an intersection not far from the scene of the accident, “to let traffic (also going west) go around me.” He continued at about 50 miles per hour until he discovered the fog, then reduced speed until the crash.

The jury found the issues of negligence against the defendants and awarded damages of $22,500.00 for the wrongful death of Larry Nelson Scarlett, passenger, and $25,000.00 for the wrongful death of Russell Wayne Scarlett, driver of the Chevrolet. The defendants appealed.

*515*Come <& Warlick by Stanley J. Come for plaintiff appellees.*

*Willis & Sigmon by Emmett C. Willis for defendant appellants.*

Per Curiam.

The plaintiffs alleged the defendants were guilty of actionable negligence in a number of respects, principally by failure of their driver to reduce speed upon discovering the dense ribbon of fog which blanketed the road over a stream; and as a result of such failure the vehicle crashed into the Chevrolet, killing the occupants. There was allegation the defendants’ vehicle was following too closely. Plowever, the evidence in support is lacking, except, perhaps, the defendants’ evidence that some trafile passed at the nearby intersection, also going west. The court charged: *“. . .*(T)he driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another . . . more closely than is reasonable and prudent, with regard to the safety of others and due regards to the speed of such vehicles and the trafile . . . and the condition of the highway. . . . The rule would vary with conditions existing from time to time and would always mean that distance at which a reasonable and prudent person would follow under the conditions as they existed at the time.”

We are doubtful whether the evidence was sufficient to warrant any charge of following too closely. If error, we consider it to be nonprejudicial. The force of the collision and other evidence of speed were decisive. No other assignment of error is seriously debated. We conclude that in the trial below there was in law

No error.
January 21, 2015

Ms. Lisa Matz, Clerk

Fifth Court of Appeals

Via Tex File

Re: Sweeney v. State; No. 05

- 14

- 00522

- CR.

Dear Ms. Matz,

This matter is currently set before Justices Francis, Lang

- Meirs, and Whitehill on

February 11, 2015 at 1 p.m. Appellant hereby gives notice Eddie Cawlfield will be

conducting oral argument at that time.

Plea se feel free to contact me about any question or concern you may have at

(972) 369

- 0577.

Best regards,

/s/ Jeremy Rosenthal

Attorney for Appellant,

Craigh Sweeney

cc: Collin County DA’s Office

Lawyer for the State 

# ROSENTHAL Jeremy F. Rosenthal*

Derk A. Wadas*

Bo Kalabus

Kyle T. Therrian

Ryan Kreck

Eddie Cawlfield

*Board Certified

– Criminal Law

Texas Board of Legal Specialization 4500 W. Eldorado Parkway, Suite 3000

McKinney, Texas 75070

TEL: 972

- 369

- 0577

FAX: 972

- 369

- 0532

WEB: www.rosenthalwadas.com 

# & WADAS

A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION ACCEPTED

05-14-00522-CR

FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

DALLAS, TEXAS

1/21/2015 12:05:09 PM

LISA MATZ

CLERK