alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Orville E. HARRIS, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 21925.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

July 21, 1965.

*913Orville E. Harris, pro se.

William A. Kimbrough, Jr., Asst. U. ' S. Atty., Mobile, Ala., Vernol R. Jansen, Jr., U. S. Atty., for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and HUTCHESON and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

On August 23, 1963, Appellant entered a plea of guilty to a charge of interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2312 and was sentenced to five years, subject to the provisions of 18 U.S.C.A. § 4208(b). On December 13, 1963, after receiving the report of the penitentiary medical staff, the district court affirmed the sentence originally imposed, but subjecting it to 18 U.S.C.A. § 4208(a) (2). Neither Appellant nor his counsel were present at the time this sentence was imposed. After Appellant alleged that the sentencing without his presence or that of his counsel violated his constitutional rights as stated in United States v. Behrens, 375 U.S. 162, 84 S.Ct. 295, 11 L.Ed.2d 224 (1963) the district court, on April 3, 1964, imposed final sentence in open court with the Appellant and his court-appointed counsel present. This sentence of 49 months allowed Appellant credit for the time spent in prison and the time spent in jail before he entered his plea of guilty. Appellant alleges that the procedure followed denied him due process of law and seeks relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255.

The district court having corrected Appellant’s sentence pursuant to Rule 35, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, so that its imposition meets the requirements of United States v. Behrens, supra, denial of relief under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 is clearly correct.

The judgment of the district court must be, and is hereby affirmed.
Exhibit
32.02








SECTION
1350 CERTIFICATION








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Macrovision Solutions Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), James
Budge certifies in his capacity as Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted), that to the best of his knowledge:





(a) 
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)), and





(b)
 The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has
hereunto signed this Certification as of November 6, 2008.











/s/
James Budge


James
Budge


Chief Financial
Officer
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

TONY LEE SMOAKS, 

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00133-MP-GRJ

SECRETARY, DEPT. OF

CORRECTIONS, 

Respondents.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation dated June 28, 2013. (Doc. 18). The parties have been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant

to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). The time for filing objections has passed, and

none have been filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto timely

filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. 

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated

by reference in this order.

2. Petition for a writ of habeas corpus, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, is

DENIED.
Page 2 of 2

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED, pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules

Governing Section 2254 Cases in the U.S. District Courts.

DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of July, 2013

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case No: 1:10-cv-00133-MP-GRJ
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cr-00027-SPM-AK

WILLY PAUL EDOUARD,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter came before the Court for initial appearance on an indictment charging

Defendant with two counts: conspiracy to cause forced labor (Count 1) and conspiracy to

fraudulently procure immigration documents (Count 4). Defendant first appeared before the

Court in Miami, Florida and was released on bond and under standard conditions, including

home confinement. The government and counsel for Defendant agreed to his release on these

same terms and conditions.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. That Defendant is released on the same terms and conditions imposed by the United

States District Court in the Southern District of Florida.

2. That this matter is set for trial before Chief Judge Stephan P. Mickle on October 25,

2010, at 8:30 a.m. Any issues regarding rescheduling of this trial should be directed to

Chief Judge Mickle.

DONE AND ORDERED this 7th day of September, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5215 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 22, 2018 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to prohibit employees found 

to have knowingly misused Department of Veterans Affairs purchase cards from serving as purchase card holders or approving officials. 

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


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5215 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Affairs Pur3 chase Card Misuse Mitigation Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. MISUSE OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

5 PURCHASE CARDS BY DEPARTMENT EMPLOY6 EES. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 7 of title 38, United 

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing new section: 

10 ‘‘§ 727. Misuse of Department purchase cards 

11 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall prohibit any 

12 employee of the Department who the Secretary or the In13 spector General of the Department determines has know14 ingly misused a purchase card from serving as a purchase 

15 card holder or approving official. Such a prohibition shall 

16 be in addition to any other applicable penalty. 

17 ‘‘(b) MISUSE.—For purposes of this section, the term 

18 ‘misuse’ means— 

19 ‘‘(1) splitting purchases; 

20 ‘‘(2) exceeding applicable purchase card limits 

21 or purchase thresholds; 

22 ‘‘(3) purchasing any unauthorized item; 

23 ‘‘(4) using a purchase card without being an 

24 authorized purchase card holder; or 

25 ‘‘(5) violating ethics standards.’’. 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 5215 RFS 

1 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

2 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting 

3 after the item relating to section 725 the following new 

4 item: 

‘‘727. Misuse of Department purchase cards.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 21, 2018. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SHERRIE RUSSELL-BROWN,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00257-MP -AK

ROBERT H JERRY, II, LEVIN COLLEGE OF LAW, THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, THE

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Notice of Withdrawal of Motion to Amend Complaint

by Sherrie Russell-Brown, Doc. 126. The Court notes that Plaintiff has withdrawn her request to

amend the Complaint. The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE Motion to Amend/Correct

Complaint, Doc. 98, as withdrawn by Plaintiff. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of August, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 31-2 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 31-2 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 31-2 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-03446-AKH Document 31-2 Filed 11/12/2007 Page 4 of 4
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

BENJAMIN B. LITTLES,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:10cv203/MCR/EMT

B. RICKARD,

Defendant.

______________________/

ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated October 31, 2011 (doc. 27). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy

of the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections

pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo

determination of any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant B. Rickard are DISMISSED with

prejudice for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).

3. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 12th day of December, 2011.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00203-MCR-EMT Document 28 Filed 12/12/11 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32

                            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 Liberty  Coal Energy  Corp.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period ended  December 31, 2010,  as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Edwin G. Morrow,  Chief Executive  Officer and Chief Financial  Officer,  on the
date  indicated  below,  hereby certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the
best of our knowledge:

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

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

Date: February 11, 2011
                                   /s/ Edwin G. Morrow
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   EDWIN G. MORROW
                                   President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief
                                   Financial Officer, Secretary, Treasurer and
                                   Director (Principal Executive Officer,
                                   Principal Financial Officer and
                                   Principal Accounting Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN_CAMERA

y. case NuMBER: |’ [OCRYS wu?

ROBERT ALEXANDER KRASNOW
/

MOTION REQUESTING AN ORDER
SEALING THE INFORMATION

The United States of America requests this Court to issue an Order sealing the
Information filed by the United States Attorney in this case, and in support of this motion states
as follows:

l. A co-defendant who will be charged by separate Indictment has not been arrested
as a result of the activities alleged in this Information. The public revelation of this Information
could hamper law enforcement’s ability to locate and apprehend the co-defendant to answer the
charges.

2. The United States further moves the Court that the Information in this case shall
remain sealed until further written Order of this Court, except that the Clerk’s Office shall
provide two certified copies of the Information to the United States Attorney for the Northern

District of Florida, two certified copies to the United States Marshal for the Northern District of

Rao

eels


Florida, and one certified copy to the United States Probation Office for the Northern District of
Florida.

WHEREFORE, in order to arrest the co-defendant before the Information is made
available to the public, it is respectfully requested that the Court order the sealing of the
Information returned in this case and also keep this motion under seal until such time that the
Information is made known to the public.

Respectfully submitted,

PAMELA C. MARSH
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,

s! Corey Z i

COREY J. SMITH

Assistant United States Attorney
Florida Bar No. 0120420

111 North Adams Street, 4" Floor
Tallahassee, FL 32301

(850) 942-8430

ORDER
The government’s motion is granted.

75”
DONE AND ORDERED this the * day of August, 2010

ITEPSTATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
#### STATE v. HALES

No. 121 PC.

Case below: 32 N.C. App. 729.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 18 May 1977.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### FEB 3 1999 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
DAVID O. BENNETT,

Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 98-3271
v. D. Kansas WILLIAM J. HENDERSON, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service,

Defendant - Appellee. (D.C. No. CV-97-2151-JWL)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before ANDERSON , KELLY , and BRISCOE , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34 (a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

David O. Bennett appeals an adverse summary judgment entered by the magistrate court in Mr. Bennett’s Rehabilitation Ac t claim against William J. Henderson, Postmaster General of the United States Postal Service. Although Mr. Bennett’s pro se brief on appeal is virtually i ncomprehensible, our review of the entire file reveals that the essence of his complaint is that the defendant violated the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791, et seq. , when he failed to reassign Bennett to another job, or to otherwise re asonably accommodate him, after it became apparent that Bennett could no long er perform the job which he had been assigned. He also claims that the defenda nt unlawfully retaliated against him for filing a complaint with the Equal E mployment Opportunity Commission. The magistrate court addressed all of Mr. Bennett’s contentions in a thorough Memorandum and Order entered August 7, 199 8. After careful review of Mr. Bennett’s contentions under the Act, and app lying our usual standards of review with respect to summary judgments, we conclu de that the magistrate court did not err either with respect to the reasonable a ccommodation/reassignment claims, the retaliation claims, or other claims mad e by Mr. Bennett.-3-

Accordingly, the judgment of the magistrate court i s AFFIRMED. ENTERED FOR THE COURT Stephen H. Anderson Circuit Judge
EXHIBIT 31.2



CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 15 U.S.C. SECTION 10A, AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Thomas Cooke, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Saratoga Resources, Inc.



2. Based on my knowledge, this report 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 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 registrants other certifying officer 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 registrant and we 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 registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;



b) [omitted in accordance with SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986];



c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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



d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



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



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant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 registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                       |  |                         |  | 
|---------------------- |  | ----------------------- |  | 
|Date: January 25, 2006 |  | /s/ Thomas Cooke        |  | 
|                       |  | Thomas Cooke            |  | 
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer |  |
<PAGE>
Exhibit 99.2

                WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                         PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SS.1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, I, the undersigned
Chief Financial Officer of Z-Tel Technologies, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby
certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Horace J. Davis III
-----------------------
Horace J. Davis III
March 31, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Z-Tel Technologies Inc. and will be retained by Z-Tel Technologies
Inc. and furished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 26, 2022

No. 04-22-00053-CR

Santiago RODRIGUEZ Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 18-0863-CR-C

Honorable Daniel H. Mills, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant’s court-appointed counsel filed an Anders brief and notified Appellant of his 

right to a free copy of the record and to file a pro se brief. Appellant requested a copy of the 

record, and we set Appellant’s brief due on September 9, 2022.

On August 17, 2022, Appellant, who is incarcerated, noted that his unit will be on annual 

lockdown for at least thirty days, he will not have access to the unit law library during that time, 

and he requested an extension of time to file his brief until November 7, 2022.

Appellant’s motion is granted. Appellant must file his pro se brief with this court by 

November 7, 2022. 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of August, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court

FILE COPY
Converted by EDGARwiz





This correspondence confirms the agreement entered into by and between Arazu, Inc., a Florida Corporation (the “Company”) and Carl Grant, an individual (the “Service Provider”).




Whereas, the Service Provider performed certain services (the “Services”) rendered to the Company and desires to be compensated for such services in shares of common stock of the Company (the “Common Shares”) and the Company desires to compensate the Service Provider with the Common Shares as set forth herein. Now therefore, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants the Company and Service Provider acknowledge and agree as follows: 




1. Service Provider is to provide engineering due diligence services to the Company in respect of assessing the viability of growing the manufacture and delivery of upgraded motorcycle parts to markets outside of the United Kingdom.




2. The Services Provider commenced the Services on 1st April 2014 and completed the Services on September 30th 2014, a six month fixed term contract.




3. The Services were provided in a professional and workman like manner in accordance with good industry practices.




4.  The Service Provider is an independent contractor and not an employee or agent of the Company.  The Company did not and was not required to make social security, workers’ compensation, or unemployment insurance payments on behalf of the Service Provider.




5.  As payment in full for the services, the Service Provider shall receive one millions and twenty thousand (1,020,000) of the Common Shares.




6. Upon issuance the Common Shares shall be validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable.




Agreed and Accepted on this 1st day of April 2014.




Arazu, Inc.




By :________________________     (Signature)




       Paul Clewlow (Print Name)

Service Provider

By : ________________________     (Signature)




       Carl Grant (Print Name)
# C_2009108EN.01000702.xml

| 12.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/7

---

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 12/2008 ‘Instrument for structural policies for pre-accession (ISPA), 2000-2006’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: www.eca.europa.eu

A hard copy and a CD-ROM version of the report may be obtained free of charge on request to the Court of Auditors:

| European Court of Auditors |
| --- |
| Communication and Reports Unit |
| 12, rue Alcide De Gasperi |
| 1615 Luxembourg |
| LUXEMBOURG |
| Tel: + 352 4398-1 |
| e-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu |

European Court of Auditors

Communication and Reports Unit

12, rue Alcide De Gasperi

1615 Luxembourg

LUXEMBOURG

Tel: + 352 4398-1

e-mail: euraud@eca.europa.eu

or by filling in an electronic order form on EU-Bookshop.

---