alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nate Rose, Appellant.

Judgment of Supreme Court, New York County (Juanita Bing Newton, J.), rendered on June 28, 1988, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted rape in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.35) and sentencing him as a persistent violent felony offender to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from eight years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was arrested on May 1, 1987 for the rape, robbery and attempted sodomy of an emotionally disturbed woman on the roof of an apartment building. Defendant submitted a notice to the District Attorney of his intent to testify before the Grand Jury. On September 15, 1987, the day the case was to be presented to the Grand Jury, a verbal confrontation occurred between the Assistant District Attorney and defense counsel, while defendant was not present, resulting in defense counsel being escorted out of the area of the District Attorney’s office where the victim was waiting. Later that day, the prosecutor was notified that defendant no longer wanted to testify.

On October 2, 1987, the People filed the indictment. At 12:12 p.m., the defendant served written notice upon the District Attorney’s office of his intention to testify. At 12:45 the defendant was arraigned on the indictment. Defendant made no mention of the filed notice.

On October 9, 1987, defendant moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he had been denied his right to testify. Specifically, he claimed that he was intimidated by the prosecutor’s actions on September 15, 1987 and that he served a timely second notice on October 2, 1987. The motion court denied the application.

Defendant waived his right to appellate review of his claim by pleading guilty. *(People v Ferrara,*99 AD2d 257.) The entry of a guilty plea by a defendant removes the issue of factual guilt from a case. *(People v Taylor,*65 NY2d 1, 5.) “Since a guilty plea is itself a conviction which waives objections going to the factual findings of guilt *(People v Thomas,*74 AD2d 317, 320 *[affd*53 NY2d 338]), it would be incongruous for an appellate court to sustain a defendant’s right to testify before the Grand Jury and to dismiss the indictment after defendant has admitted guilt in his plea.” *(People v Ferrara, supra,*at 259.)

Nor was defendant denied effective assistance of counsel *241when his motion to dismiss the indictment was filed two days late. The record does not reveal that defense counsel failed to provide meaningful representation. *(People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137.) Defendant has not shown that but for defense counsel’s inaction the outcome of the proceeding would have been different. *(People v Mackey,*155 AD2d 297; *People v De La Hoz,*131 AD2d 154.) Although the court held the motion to dismiss was untimely, she nevertheless addressed the issues and found them to be without merit. Accordingly, defendant was not prejudiced by defense counsel’s representation. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Carro and Milonas, JJ.
##### 



Exhibit 21.1
 The SCO Group, Inc. Listing of Subsidiaries
 Subsidiary
    
    Location
    
    Ownership InterestSCO Operations, Inc.
    
    United States
    
    Wholly ownedSCO Global, Inc.
    
    United States
    
    Wholly ownedSCO Software (UK) Ltd.
    
    United Kingdom
    
    Wholly ownedSCO Japan, Ltd.
    
    Japan
    
    Wholly ownedSCO Canada, Inc.
    
    Canada
    
    Wholly ownedThe SCO Group (Deutschland) GmbH
    
    Germany
    
    Wholly ownedThe SCO Group (France) Sarl
    
    France
    
    Wholly ownedSCO Software (India) Private Ltd.
    
    India
    
    Wholly owned
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aviza Technology, Inc.(the “Company”), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Companycertifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge:

(1)           the accompanying report on Form 10-Qof the Company for the quarter ended March 30, 2007, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended; and

(2)           the information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company for the periods presented therein.

Date: May 11, 2007
| By:    |   | /s/ Patrick C. O’Connor                         |   |   |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|   |   | Patrick C. O’Connor                             |   |   |
|   |   | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |   |   |

 

----
EXHIBIT
32.1


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C., ss.1350 AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Smartpay Express, Inc. (the
"Company") for the quarter ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:





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





2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Smartpay Express
Inc.








Date: May
      19, 2008
            By
            /s/
      Ping TangPing
      TangChairman
      and Chief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael Sims, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K
  of Texen Oil & Gas, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
  financial information included in this quarterly 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
  quarterly report.
4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are
  responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
  procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15) for the
  registrant and we have:

> designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is
>   being prepared;
> 
>     evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
>   controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date
>   of this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and
>     presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
>   effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
>   evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

1. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have
  disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors
  and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
  performing the equivalent function):

> all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
>   internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
>   record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for
>   the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
>     any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management
>   or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
>   controls; and

1. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
  quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
  controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
  subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
  actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Dated this 5th day of November, 2004.

/s/ Michael SimsMichael SimsPrincipal Executive Officer and Principal Financial
      Officer


---
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5539 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5539

To amend title XI of the Social Security Act to expand and clarify the 
  exclusion for orphan drugs under the Drug Price Negotiation Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 18, 2023

 Mr. Joyce of Pennsylvania (for himself and Mr. Nickel) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
  Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a 
 period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
                          committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XI of the Social Security Act to expand and clarify the 
  exclusion for orphan drugs under the Drug Price Negotiation Program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Optimizing Research Progress Hope 
And New Cures Act'' or the ``ORPHAN Cures Act''.

SEC. 2. EXPANDING AND CLARIFYING THE EXCLUSION FOR ORPHAN DRUGS UNDER 
              THE DRUG PRICE NEGOTIATION PROGRAM.

    Section 1191(e) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320f(e)) is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by adding at the end the following 
        new subparagraph:
                    ``(C) Treatment of former orphan drugs.--In 
                calculating the amount of time that has elapsed with 
                respect to the approval of a drug or licensure of a 
                biological product under subparagraph (A)(ii) and 
                subparagraph (B)(ii), respectively, the Secretary shall 
                not taken into account any period during which such 
                drug or product was a drug described in paragraph 
                (3)(A).''; and
            (2) in paragraph (3)(A)--
                    (A) by striking ``only one rare disease or 
                condition'' and inserting ``one or more rare diseases 
                or conditions''; and
                    (B) by striking ``such disease or condition'' and 
                inserting ``one or more rare diseases or conditions''.
                                 <all>
```
----

**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**

 I, David Lam, President and Chief Executive Officer of Balsam  Ventures, Inc. (the “Company”), 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 my knowledge: 

|   | (i)    | the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company,        for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, and to which this certification        is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the “Report”) fully complies with        the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange        Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
|   | (ii)   | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,        in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations        of the Company.                                                                                                                                                                    |

|   | By:    | */s/ David Lam*                       |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                  |
|   | Name:  | David Lam                             |
|   |   |                                  |
|   | Title: | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|   |   |                                  |
|   | Date:  | April 14, 2004                        |

*A signed original of this written statement required by  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Registrant  and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon request.*

*This certification accompanies the Form 10-KSB to which  it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission  and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Registrant  under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether  made before or after the date of the Form 10-KSB), irrespective of any general  incorporation language contained in such filing.*

----
#### Alice Ewing Phillip CAMPBELL, Respondent, v. Emerson SUTTON, Appellant.

No. 62256.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Dec. 22, 1992.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 4, 1993.

Emerson Sutton, pro se.

John K. Sheehan, Kirkwood, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant (Debtor) appeals the jury award of $9,000 on Respondent’s (Creditor) action to recover an amount due and owing on a promissory note. Debtor has elected to handle his own appeal to his detriment. His brief does not comply with Rule 84.04 in most respects. Debtor alleges four points of error: (1) failure of Creditor to make a submissible case; (2) insufficient evidence to support the jury instructions; (3) improper introduction of evidence; and (4) failure to instruct on comparative fault. We are unable to review the record for these errors, because Debtor did not file a transcript of the trial proceedings showing wherein and how there was reversible error. *Wilmering v. Whelan Security Co.,*800 S.W.2d 806, 806[1] (Mo.App.1990); *Verdin v. Agnew,*715 S.W.2d 544, 546[1] (Mo.App.1986); *Cooper v. General Standard, Inc.,*674 S.W.2d 117, 122[6] (Mo.App.1984). It is the duty of Debtor to furnish the transcript and in its absence there is nothing for us to review. *Cooper,*674 S.W.2d at 122[6].

Appeal dismissed.
#### Grace E. SPRAGUE, Appellant, v. MISSOURI DIVISION OF FAMILY SERVICES, Respondent.

No. WD 48866.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Jan. 10, 1995.

Linda S. Penrod, Kansas City, for appellant.

Shelly A. Register, Div. of Legal Services, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before HANNA, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SMART, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an administrative order revoking a family day care home license.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 86 (Thursday, May 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19638-19639]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10858]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--National Storage Industry Consortium--Ultrahigh 
Capacity Optical Disk (``UCOD'') Project

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 12, 1995, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), the National Storage 
Industry Consortium (``NISC'') has filed written notifications on 
behalf of Carnegie Mellon University; Eastman Kodak Company; and SDL 
Inc., simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing (1) the identities of the parties and (2) the 
nature and objectives of the project. The notifications were filed for 
the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of 
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties to 
the project are NSIC, San Diego, CA; Carnegie Mellon University, 
Pittsburgh,

[[Page 19639]]

PA; Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester, NY; and SDL, Inc., San Jose, CA.
    The area of planned activity for the UCOD Project is to engage in 
research in the area of optical disk technology.

Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-10858 Filed 5-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Accentia Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
Company) for the three months ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Alan M. Pearce, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The form 10-Q fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended: and

(2) The information contained in the Form
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:
May 15, 2006



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Alan M. Pearce     
|Alan M. Pearce         
|Chief Financial Officer

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Accentia Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the
date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 86 (Thursday, May 2, 1996)]
[Presidential Documents]
[Page 19505]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11099]





                        Presidential Documents 



Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 86 / Thursday, May 2, 1996 / 
Presidential Documents

[[Page 19505]]


                Memorandum of April 26, 1996

                
Suspension of Subsection 325(a) and Subsection 
                325(b) of the Department of the Interior and Related 
                Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996, (``Act'') as Set 
                Forth in Section 101(c) of Title I of the Omnibus 
                Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 
                (H.R. 3019) Concerning the Tongass National Forest

                Memorandum for the Secretary of Agriculture

                By the authority vested in me by subsection 325(c) of 
                the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
                Appropriations Act, 1996, (``Act'') as set forth in 
                section 101(c) of title I of the Omnibus Consolidated 
                Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 (H.R. 3019), 
                and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I 
                hereby suspend subsections 325(a) and 325(b) of the Act 
                because I have determined that such suspension is 
                appropriate based upon the public interest in sound 
                environmental management and protection of cultural, 
                biological, or historic resources.

                This suspension shall take effect immediately and shall 
                continue in effect for the period in which subsection 
                325(a) and subsection 325(b) of the Act would otherwise 
                be in effect.

                You are authorized and directed to publish this 
                memorandum in the Federal Register.

                    (Presidential Sig.)<Clinton1><Clinton2>

                THE WHITE HOUSE,

                    Washington, April 26, 1996.

[FR Doc. 96-11099
Filed 5-1-96; 8:45 am]
Billing code 3410-11-M
**Exhibit 13.2**

**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 20-F for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2005 of Acergy S.A. (the “Company”) as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Commission”) on the date hereof (the “Report”) and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Stuart Jackson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,that: 

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended; and 

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company. 

Date: June 30, 2006 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been providedto Acergy S.A. and will be retained by Acergy S.A. and furnished to the Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6882

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus DEWROD MCCOLL, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Rockingham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-93-193, CA-97-1329-1) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 2, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dewrod McColl, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Dewrod McColl appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. McColl , Nos. CR-93-193; CA-97-1329-1 (M.D.N.C. June 1, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED