alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
J

- S50005

- 16

NON
- PRECEDENTIAL DECISION
- SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENN SYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.

GREGORY B. BARTUCCI
Appellant No. 1686 MDA 2015

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence July 8, 2015 in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County Criminal Division

at No(s): CP

- 36

- CR

- 0001286

- 2014

BEFORE: MUNDY, STABILE , and FITZGERALD, * JJ.

JUDGMENT ORDER BY FITZGERALD, J.: FILED NOVEMBER 18, 2016
Appellant filed a pro se “Motion

- Application for: (A) leave to proceed

pro se on direct appeal; (B) dismissal of assigned counsel; (C) to strike any
prospective merits brief submitted by [counsel]; (D) leave to file 1925(a) [ 1 ]

statement n unc pro tunc and; (E) leave to file extended length brief.” We
remand this case for a hearing pursuant to Commonwealth v. Grazier , 713 A.2d 81 (Pa. 1998). 2

* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.

1 Appellant referenced Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a), when he intended Rule 1925(b). See Defendant

- Appellant’s Motion, 10/13/16, at 7.

2 Pursuant to Grazier , “when an appellant requests pro se status after his counsel has filed an appellate brief, the request is unt imely.” Id. at 82 (citation omitted). On September 23, 2016, counsel filed an advocate’s brief. On October 13, 2016, the instant motion was received by this Court.J

- S50005

- 16

- 2

-

A criminal appellant has a constitutional right to counsel on direct
appeal. Commonwealth v. Wre cks , 931 A.2d 717, 722 (Pa. Super. 2007).
“When a waiver of the right to counsel is sought at . . . the appellate stages,

an on - the

- record determination should be made that the waiver is a
knowing, intelligent, and voluntary one.” Grazier , 713 A.2d at 82. Thus,
we remand this case for proceedings consistent with the foregoing.

The trial court is to conduct a Grazier hearing within thirty days. We
direct the Prothonotary to enter a new briefing schedule based upon the

outcome of the Grazier hearing.

C ase remanded. Jurisdiction retained.
Judge Mundy did not participate in the consideration or decision of this

case.

However, the verification is dated August 20, 2016. In an abundance of caution, based u pon the prisoner mailbox rule, we will consider the motion timely. See Commonwealth v. Chambers , 35 A.3d 34, 38 (Pa. Super. 2011 (holding “a pro se prisoner’s document is deemed filed on the date he delivers it to prison authorities for mailing”) (citatio n omitted)).
# C_2009295EN.01000502.xml

| 4.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/5

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5687 — CVC/Subsidiaries of Interbrew Central European Holding)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2009/C 295/04

On 26 November 2009, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5687. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32009M5687. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Exhibit 32.1  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Porfavor, Inc., for the Quarterly ended September 30, 2009, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, that:  (1)the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Porfavor, Inc., for the Quarterly ended September 30, 2009 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the Quarterly ended September 30, 2009, fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of International Industrial Enterprises.  By: /s/ Boyd V. ApplegateName: Boyd V. ApplegateTitle: CEO, President, DirectorDate: December 3, 2009By: /s/ Christine M. ApplegateName: Christine M. ApplegateTitle: CFO, Controller, Treasurer, Secretary, DirectorDate: December 3, 2009
Exhibit 23 - Consent of Experts

G. BRAD BECKSTEAD
---------------------------
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT
                                                          330 E. Warm Springs
                                                          Las Vegas, NV 89119
                                                                 702.257.1984
                                                           702.362.0540 (fax)




March 22, 2002


To Whom It May Concern:

The firm of G. Brad Beckstead, CPA, consents to the inclusion of my
report of March 22, 2002, on the Financial Statements of Global
Boulevard International, Inc. for the years ended December 31, 2001
and 2000, in Form 10KSB to be filed with the US Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Signed,

/s/ G. Brad Beckstead
-----------------------------
G. Brad Beckstead, CPA



<PAGE>
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
# C_2009115EN.01001601.xml

| 20.5.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/16

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

19 May 2009

2009/C 115/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3612 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 130,91 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4465 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87940 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4705 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5146 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,7450 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,669 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 278,18 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7091 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3770 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1655 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,0923 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7563 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5754 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,5513 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,2512 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9914 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 695,45 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 11,5437 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,2896 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3600 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 13 946,30 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8057 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 64,169 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 43,3374 |
| THB | Thai baht | 46,839 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,7959 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,5799 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 65,0450 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3612

JPY

Japanese yen

130,91

DKK

Danish krone

7,4465

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87940

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4705

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5146

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,7450

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,669

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

278,18

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7091

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3770

RON

Romanian leu

4,1655

TRY

Turkish lira

2,0923

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7563

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5754

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,5513

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,2512

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9914

KRW

South Korean won

1 695,45

ZAR

South African rand

11,5437

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,2896

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3600

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

13 946,30

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8057

PHP

Philippine peso

64,169

RUB

Russian rouble

43,3374

THB

Thai baht

46,839

BRL

Brazilian real

2,7959

MXN

Mexican peso

17,5799

INR

Indian rupee

65,0450

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0605 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DAVID ALAN WARREN,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including October 16 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 12 2024

09/12/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0605
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50383

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

TAMMY DIANE RICHARDS

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 6:06-CR-185-ALL

Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Tammy Diane Richards appeals her sentence following her guilty plea

conviction for possessing stolen mail and forging an endorsement on a United

States Treasury check. Because her plea agreement contained a waiver of

appeal waiving her right to appeal her sentence on any ground, including any

right conferred by 18 U.S.C. § 3742, and because the rearraignment transcript

shows that her waiver of appeal was knowing and voluntary, her appeal is

barred. See United States v. McKinney, 406 F.3d 744, 746-47 (5th Cir. 2005).

AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 28, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

SHARON DAVIS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 1:10cv169-SPM/GRJ

LANCE, INC.,

Defendant.

_______________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Pursuant to the Notice of Settlement (doc. 6) and Northern District of

Florida Local Rule 16.2(D), it is 

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. This case is dismissed with prejudice.

2. The Court retains jurisdiction for a period of 60 days, during which

time any party may move to reopen for good cause shown.

DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of November, 2010.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

Case 1:10-cv-00169-SPM-GRJ Document 7 Filed 11/09/10 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. LITTLE

No. 139 PC.

Case below: 27 N.C. App. 467i

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 17 December 1975.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JAMES ARTHUR JONES, MARY ANN JONES, OZIAH CARSON JONES, SHANTELL

SHAMEA JONES, KEVIN KENNEDY, MURIELLE KELLY KENNEDY, SANDRA WATTS

KENNEDY, FARINDA OSTEEN, MARIA PARSONS, MICHAEL PARSONS, AARON

JONES STEPHENSON, CARLOS UDAE STEPHENSON,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00071-MP -GRJ

BEAZER EAST INC, CABOT CORPORATION, KOPPERS INC,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 14, Notice of Voluntary Dismissal by Plaintiffs. 

Plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss defendant Cabot Corporation from this lawsuit. Because no answer

or motion for summary judgment has been filed in this case, Plaintiffs may do so as a matter of

right under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(I). Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Doc. 14, is ACCEPTED. 

2. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to defendant Cabot

Corporation, each of Plaintiffs and Cabot Corporation to bear their own costs and

fees. 

3. The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE Cabot Corporation as a defendant,

adjusting the case style accordingly. 

4. The only remaining defendants in this case are Beazer East Inc. and Koppers, Inc. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of September, 2010

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:10-cv-00071-MP -GRJ Document 20 Filed 09/27/10 Page 1 of 1
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department 900 CAF 12-01218 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ.
IN THE MATTER OF ALAZAYA I.B., JAVONTE W.G., MAREYAH A.B. AND NORMAN J.B.
----------------------------------------------- JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ORDER PETITIONER-RESPONDENT; MATTHEW J.B., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)
CARA A. WALDMAN, FAIRPORT, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. DEBORAH R. GARDINER, WATERTOWN, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. ASHLEY N. LYON, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, ADAMS. LISA WELDON, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, WATERTOWN. SCOTT A. OTIS, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, WATERTOWN. Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Jefferson County (Richard V. Hunt, J.), entered May 25, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10. The order, among other things, adjudged that respondent neglected the subject children. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Entered: September 27, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

 PANAMA CITY DIVISION

CORNELIUS DEWAYNE TAYLOR,

Petitioner,

vs. Case No. 5:10cv194/SPM/MD

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, et al.,

Respondents.

O R D E R

This cause is before the court upon petitioner filing a petition for writ of habeas

corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (doc. 1), a supporting memorandum (doc. 2) and a motion

to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. 3). 

Petitioner’s habeas corpus petition is deficient in that it is unsigned. Fed. R. Civ. P.

11; N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.1(B)(5); N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.1(J)(2). Petitioner will therefore be

required to file an amended petition. To amend his petition, petitioner should completely

fill out a new § 2241 petition form, marking it “Amended Petition.” Petitioner is advised

that the amended petition must contain all of his grounds for relief, and it should not in any

way refer to the previously filed materials. Once an amended petition is filed, all earlier

petitions are disregarded. N. D. Fla. Loc. R. 15.1. 

In addition, petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is deficient. A complete

application to proceed in forma pauperis includes a motion with supporting affidavit, a

prisoner consent form and financial certificate with account attachments (a printout of the

transactions in petitioner’s inmate trust account for the six-month period immediately

preceding the filing of the petition). Petitioner failed to sign his motion and prisoner

consent form, and failed to include the required account printout. Petitioner is reminded
Page 2 of 2

that it is his responsibility to obtain the required printout(s) from each institution at which

he may have been confined during the past six-month period.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The clerk is directed to send petitioner a § 2241 petition form and a form

application to proceed in forma pauperis. This case number shall be written on the forms.

2. Within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of this order, petitioner shall file an

amended petition which shall be typed or clearly written, and submitted on the court form.

3. Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. 3) is DENIED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE.

4. Within twenty-eight (28) days of the date of this order, petitioner shall either pay

the $5.00 filing fee, or submit a complete application for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis.

5. Petitioner’s failure to respond to this order as instructed will result in a

recommendation of dismissal of this action for failure to comply with an order of the court.

DONE AND ORDERED this 20 day of August, 2010. th

 /s/ Miles Davis

MILES DAVIS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case No: 5:10cv194/SPM/MD
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FILED AS
PART OF THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          46,826
<SECURITIES>                                       386
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,554
<ALLOWANCES>                                       286
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                57,379
<PP&E>                                           2,990
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,472
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  60,642
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,431
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        48,362
<OTHER-SE>                                         637
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    60,642
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,833
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,977
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     9
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   473
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 120
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,593
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,601
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,992
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,992
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10


</TABLE>
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DWIGHT J PORTER,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:10-cv-00206-RS-GRJ

BAXTER, et al,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

Service was returned un-executed on Defendants Colonel Baxter (Doc. 28) and 

Captain Tyson. (Doc. 29). The complaint, summons and waiver for Colonel Baxter was

returned to the United States Marshals Service marked “RTS not here” with no

forwarding information. (Doc. 28). The papers were returned for Captain Tyson after

being forwarded from Graceville Work Camp to Graceville Correctional Facility with the

notation from Graceville CF, “this was forward to our facility by mistake. I think this

should have went to Graceville Work Camp not Graceville Correctional Fac. And they

forward to us.” (Doc. 29). 

The Court currently has no listed special process server for either of these

facilities, which are operated by Corrections Corporation of America. Typically, when

service attempts upon employees of the Florida Department of Corrections are

unsuccessful the special process servers at the various institutions provide the Court

with forwarding work address information, if the persons are still employed with the

DOC. If additional service problems arise, the Court requests the assistance of counsel

for the FDOC to provide home or other addresses for service of process which are filed
Page 2 of 2

under seal and kept confidential. 

In the present case, counsel has entered an appearance on behalf of Defendant

Simmons (Doc. 31), and the Court requests similar assistance from counsel in locating

Baxter and Tyson, who may or may not be employed at one of the Graceville facilities-- 

Graceville Correctional Facility, 5168 Ezell Road, Graceville, Florida 32440 or

Graceville Work Camp, 5230 Ezell Road, Graceville, Florida 32440. If these persons

are not employed at either correctional facility and their home addresses are provided,

the addresses will remain confidential. The Court requests this information to allow for

a joint response by all the named defendants to the Third Amended Complaint, if

possible, and to avoid further delays in service should Plaintiff be required to seek this

information through a formal discovery process.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED:

That counsel for Defendant Simmons, having entered an appearance in this

matter, is requested to provide to the Court within twenty days either the current work or

home address for Defendants Baxter and Tyson by filing a Notice under seal in this

case. The Notice should be filed with the Clerk of Court and be clearly marked in the

style of the case “TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL,” with this Order attached. The address

will be kept confidential and forwarded by the Court for service upon Defendants by the 

United States Marshal. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 25 day of February, 2011. 

th

s/Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 5:10-cv-00206-RS -GRJ
#### TIMBER CO. v. SMITH

No. 23 PC.

Case below: 12 N.C. App. 137.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 September 1971.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 14.2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Amendment No. 4 to the
Registration Statement, No. 333-102800, of Durban Roodepoort Deep, Limited on
Form F-3 and Registration Statement, No. 333-121386, of DRDGOLD Limited on Form
F-4 of our report dated September 29, 2003 appearing in the Annual Report on
Form 20-F/A (Amendment No. 3) of DRDGOLD Limited for the year ended June 30,
2004.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche

Deloitte & Touche
Chartered Accountants (SA)

Johannesburg, South Africa

April 29, 2005