alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
767 P.2d 835

#### STATE of Idaho, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. William S. TOWNSEND, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17439.

Court of Appeals of Idaho.

Jan. 26, 1989.

Joan M. Fisher, Moscow, for defendant-appellant.

Jim Jones, Atty. Gen., Myrna A.I. Stah-man, Deputy Atty. Gen., Boise, for plaintiff-respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to plea negotiations, William Townsend pled guilty to a charge of forgery. I.C. § 18-3601. Townsend received a unified sentence of fourteen years, with a five-year minimum period of confinement. I.C. § 19-2513. After the judgment was entered, Townsend filed a motion under I.C.R. 35 for reduction of the sentence. The motion was denied. The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in denying Townsend’s motion. We affirm.

A Rule 35 motion is essentially a plea for leniency which may be granted if the sentence imposed upon the defendant was, for any reason, unduly severe. *State v. Lopez,*106 Idaho 447, 680 P.2d 869 (Ct.App.1984). Such a motion is directed to the sound discretion of the district court. *State v. Roach,*112 Idaho 173, 730 P.2d 1093 (Ct.App.1986). On appeal, we will determine whether the entire record, including any facts presented in connection with the motion, shows that the district court abused its discretion in failing to grant the leniency requested. *State v. Stanfield,*112 Idaho 601, 733 P.2d 822 (Ct.App.1987). In making this determination, we apply the same criteria used for reviewing the reasonableness of the original sentence. *State v. Toohill,*103 Idaho 565, 650 P.2d 707 (Ct.App.1982).

In the instant case, Townsend’s conviction was the result of a scheme to cash forged checks at several banks in the Moscow area. Townsend contends that the five-year fixed portion of his sentence is *461unduly harsh because it would take away his motivation for rehabilitation. However, in imposing Townsend’s sentence, the district court took into consideration the fact that Townsend had not been rehabilitated while serving a reduced sentence for a prior felony offense. Furthermore, the judge noted that Townsend had persuaded a conspirator to join in the forgery scheme, and that a checkwriting machine was found in Townsend’s possession at the time of his arrest. Having reviewed the record and having considered the sentence review criteria set forth in *State v. Toohill, supra,*we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Townsend’s motion. The judgment of conviction imposing the sentence is affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Kenneth J. Saunders, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,
except for the failure to timely file the Annual Report on Form 10-K, this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report of Peregrine Systems, Inc. on
Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that
the information contained in the Annual Report of Form 10-K as amended by this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A, fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Peregrine Systems, Inc.

Date:
October 18, 2005

| |  |  | /s/KENNETH J. SAUNDERSKenneth J. Saunders
Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
| |  |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Peregrine Systems, Inc. and will be retained by Peregrine Systems, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.

---



QuickLinks
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 185 Referred in House (RFH)]

  1st Session
                                 S. 185

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 4, 1999

              Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To establish a Chief Agricultural Negotiator in the Office of the 
                  United States Trade Representative.

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

SECTION 1. CHIEF AGRICULTURAL NEGOTIATOR.

    (a) Establishment of a Position.--There is established the position 
of Chief Agricultural Negotiator in the Office of the United States 
Trade Representative. The Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall be 
appointed by the President, with the rank of Ambassador, by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate.
    (b) Functions.--The primary function of the Chief Agricultural 
Negotiator shall be to conduct trade negotiations and to enforce trade 
agreements relating to U.S. agricultural products and services. The 
Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall be a vigorous advocate on behalf of 
U.S. agricultural interests. The Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall 
perform such other functions as the United States Trade Representative 
may direct.
    (c) Compensation.--The Chief Agricultural Negotiator shall be paid 
at the highest rate of basic pay payable to a member of the Senior 
Executive Service.

            Passed the Senate November 3, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                    GARY SISCO,

                                                             Secretary.
```
EXHIBIT 99.1

                         CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                          18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                          AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
               SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Office Managers, Inc., on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, John Hickey, Chief Executive Officer and John Ray Rask, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
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.


Date: August 26, 2002           /s/ John M. Hickey
                                ---------------------------------------
                                John M. Hickey, Chief Executive Officer


Date: August 26, 2002           /s/ John Ray Rask
                                --------------------------------------
                                John Ray Rask, Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32 Chief Executive and Financial Officer Certification (Section 906)   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C.,SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, Steve Bergstrom, the undersigned Chief Executive and Financial Officer of Silver Hill Mines, Inc., (the Company), herby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 operation of the Company.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  Dated: November 16, 2009.  By: /s/ Steve Bergstrom Steve Bergstrom Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 11

Statement re computation of per-share earnings


Basic per share data is calculated based on the weighted-average number of
common shares outstanding during the reported period.  Diluted per share
data includes any dilution from potential common stock outstanding, such
as the exercise of stock options.



                             Nine Months Ended        Three Months Ended
                               September 30,             September 30,

                            2001         2000         2001        2000
                         __________  ___________   __________  __________
Numerator:
  Net income(loss)       $9,474,000  $10,871,000   $3,453,000  $3,368,000
                         ==========  ===========   ==========  ==========
Denominator:
  Denominator for
  Basic income (loss)
  Per share -
  Weighted average
  Shares                  6,487,456    7,181,693    6,199,674   7,171,198

Dilutive potential
  Common shares -
  Employee stock
  Options                         0        2,980        7,798       3,037
                         __________  ___________   __________  __________
Denominator for
  Diluted earnings
  (loss) per share -
  Adjusted weighted
  Average shares          6,487,456    7,184,673    6,207,472   7,174,235
                         ==========  ===========   ==========  ==========
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>






<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Globecomm Systems Inc. Financial Statements, and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          21,342
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,017
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,583
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                45,993
<PP&E>                                          11,069
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,106
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,344
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,330
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             9
<OTHER-SE>                                      50,530
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,344
<SALES>                                         58,105
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                58,105
<CGS>                                           49,532
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   10,385
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (546)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (546)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (546)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        


                                      

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.2




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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Metropolitan Health Networks,
Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert
J. Sabo, Chief Financial Officer of Metropolitan, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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
      Metropolitan.




/s/ ROBERT J.
      SABORobert
      J. SaboChief
      Financial OfficerFebruary 24,
2009
<PAGE>



EXHIBIT 10.1


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Total Film Group,
Inc. and Subsidiaries' Registration Statement on Form 10-SB/A-5 dated December
8, 2000 of our report dated September 21, 2000 to our audit of the consolidated
financial statements of Total Film Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of June 30,
2000 and for the year then ended, which report is included in the Total Film
Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries' Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
June 30, 2000.


                                                  /s/ HOLLANDER, LUMER & CO, LLP

Los Angeles, California

February 15, 2001


                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in Total Film Group, Inc.
and Subsidiaries' Registration Statement on Form 10-SB/A-5 dated October 13,
2000 of our report dated September 29, 1999, except for Note 8, which is as of
January 14, 2000 and Note 15 which is as of September 21, 2000, with reference
to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of Total Film Group, Inc.
and Subsidiaries as of June 30, 1999 and for the year then ended, which report
is included in Total Film Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries' Annual Report on Form
10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2000.

                                            /s/ Miller, Kaplan, Arase & Co., LLP

February 15, 2001

North Hollywood, California
#### Ockerman v. Woodward.

(Decided January 13, 1915.)

Appeal from Nelson Circuit Court.

1. Appeal. — An appeal is taken within the meaning of the statute when it is granted by the Circuit Court; the date of filing the *135record in the office of the Clerk of the Court of Appeals does not control.

2. Appeal — Dismissal.—Where an appeal was granted by the Cir-euit Court on June 9th, 1914 from a judgment dismissing a petition ior $475.00 damages, and the record was filed in this court on December 14, 1914, the appeal is controlled by the Act of 1898, and will not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

ERNEST N. FULTON, G. S. *&*J. A. FULTON for appellant.

KELLEY *&*KELLEY and REDFORD C. CHERRY for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY

CHIEF JUSTICE Miller

Overruling motion to dismiss appeal.

Oekerman sued the appellee for $475.00 damages; his petition was dismissed on June 5, 1914. The order of June 9, 1914, overruling Oekerman’s motion for a new trial, granted him an appeal to this court. Oekerman filed his record in the office of the clerk of this court on December 14,1914, whereupon appellee moved this court to dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Under the Act of March 14, 1898, the minimum jurisdiction of this court, in cases of this character, was fixed at $200.00; and it so remained until the Act of March 17, 1914, fixed said minimum jurisdiction at $500.00, with the right in this court to grant an appeal in certain cases, specified in the act, wherein the recovery was as much as $200.00, exclusive of interest and costs. Acts 1914, p. 94. Upon filing his record in this court appellant, out of abundant caution, entered a motion in this court for an appeal, as provided by Section 3 of the Act of 1914.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is based upon the idea that the appeal is controlled by the Act of 1914, because the record was filed in the office of the clerk of this court on December 14, 1914, after the Act of March 17, 1914, became effective, and that the appeal has been granted by this court. Neither fact, however, is true. The appeal was taken within the meaning of the statute when it was granted by the circuit court. Terry v. Johnson, 105 Ky., 760; Frost v. Rowan, 21 Ky. L. R., 1777, 56 S. W., 427; Alexander v. Warner, 22 Ky. L. R., 720, 58 S. W., 700; Hill v. Booth, 22 Ky. L. R., 840, 58 S. W., 993.

Under Section 55 of the Constitution, the Act of March 17,1914, did not become effective until ninety days after that date; and, as the appeal was granted by the¡ *136circuit court ou June 9th, 1914, before the Áct of March 17, 1914, became effective, it is to he controlled by the Act of 1898, -which was then in force.

The appeal is here as a matter of right; and the fact that appellant, out of abundant caution, moved this court for an appeal under the Act of 1914, chnnot affect appellant’s rights under the original appeal granted in the circuit court, which has never been abandoned and was prosecuted within the time prescribed by the Code.

Motion to dismiss appeal overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          12,310
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,506
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   866
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     57,635
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          12,560
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            12,370
<LOANS>                                        340,885
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,721
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 434,423
<DEPOSITS>                                     370,084
<SHORT-TERM>                                    25,057
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,316
<LONG-TERM>                                      7,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,966
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 434,423
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 12,533
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,390
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    73
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                14,996
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               6,310
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,806
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,190
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       77
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  92
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,854
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,369
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,277
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,092
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .50
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .48
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.15
<LOANS-NON>                                        595
<LOANS-PAST>                                       245
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    840
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,665
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      127
<RECOVERIES>                                       106
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,721
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,721
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
**Applied Signal Technology, Inc.Exhibit 32.1**

Certification of Chief Executive 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 Report of Applied Signal Technology, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 28, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Gary L. Yancey, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

- The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
- The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

| /s/ Gary L. Yancey      --------------------------------------------------------- | Date: August 31, 2006      -------------------------------- |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|
| Gary L. Yancey,      President and      Chief Executive Officer                   |                                                        |
IB

Union Calendar No. 524

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1778

[Report No. 106–871]

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 2, 2000

Referred to the Committee on Resources

SEPTEMBER 20, 2000

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

AN ACT

To provide for equal exchanges of land around the Cascade

Reservoir.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXCHANGES OF LAND EXCESS TO CASCADE

4 RESERVOIR RECLAMATION PROJECT.

5 Section 5 of Public Law 86–92 (73 Stat. 219) is

6 amended by striking subsection (b) and inserting the fol7 lowing:

8 ‘‘(b) LAND EXCHANGES.—
2

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may ex2 change land of either class described in subsection

3 (a) for non-Federal land of not less than approxi4 mately equal value, as determined by an appraisal

5 carried out in accordance with—

6 ‘‘(A) the Uniform Relocation Assistance

7 and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of

8 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.); and

9 ‘‘(B) the publication entitled ‘Uniform Ap10 praisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisi11 tions’, as amended by the Interagency Land Ac12 quisition Conference in consultation with the

13 Department of Justice.

14 ‘‘(2) EQUALIZATION.—If the land exchanged

15 under paragraph (1) is not of equal value, the values

16 shall be equalized by the payment of funds by the

17 Secretary or the grantor, as appropriate, in an

18 amount equal to the amount by which the values of

19 the land differ.’’.

Passed the Senate April 13, 2000.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.

Union Calendar No. 524

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1778

[Report No. 106–871]

AN ACT

To provide for equal exchanges of land around the

Cascade Reservoir.

SEPTEMBER 20, 2000

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed