alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

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

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned, D. Elroy Fimrite, President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of Texen Oil & Gas, Inc., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
| (1) | the annual report on Form 10-KSB of Texen Oil & Gas, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2004 (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 Texen Oil & Gas, Inc.                                                              |

Dated:  May 20, 2005

/s/ D. Elroy Fimrite

D. Elroy Fimrite, President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Treasurer

(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Texen Oil & Gas, Inc. and will be retained by Texen Oil & Gas, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

D/ljm/697967.1
**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 quarterly report of Brooklyn Federal Bancorp, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard
      A. Kielty, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial 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:





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











Date:
      May
      14, 2007





/s/
      Richard A. Kielty


Richard
      A. Kielty


Executive
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5969 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5969

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 6, 2024

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to revise certain 
 regulations to permit certain children to accompany their parents or 
   legal guardians through Global Entry airport lanes, and for other 
                               purposes.

    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 ``Improving Travel for Families Act''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF GLOBAL ENTRY TO CERTAIN CHILDREN.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall revise 
section 235.12 of title 8, Code of Federal Regulations, to permit a 
child who is 10 years old or younger who is not a member of Global 
Entry in accordance with such section and who is traveling with such 
child's parent or legal guardian who is a member of Global Entry in 
accordance with such section to accompany such parent or legal guardian 
through a Global Entry lane upon arrival at an international airport in 
the United States.
    (b) Appointments.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall take 
such actions as may be necessary to permit a parent or legal guardian 
of up to four children described in subsection (a) who is applying for 
membership in Global Entry on behalf of such children to schedule

              

 a single appointment for an interview relating to such membership for 
all such children.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 5, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NOVEMBER 14, 2019

NO. 03-18-00762-CR

Alexander Ulysses Chabrier, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 274TH DISTRICT COURT OF HAYS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND SMITH

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE TRIANA

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the 

trial court’s judgment of conviction. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment of 

conviction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is 

made.
Hecla Mining Company Exhibit 10.8 to Form 10-Q







Exhibit 10.8


 


WAIVER AND CONSENT


 


_______________
(“Employee”) and Hecla Mining Company (the “Company”) are parties to that certain Employment Agreement dated
____________ (the “Employment Agreement”); and


 


WHEREAS, among other things,
the Employment Agreement provides that the Effective Date occurs upon a Change of Control (as defined therein); and


 


WHEREAS, the Company intends to
create a holding company structure pursuant to the provisions of Section 251(g) of the Delaware Corporation Law; and


 


WHEREAS, the Employment
Agreement may become applicable to successors or assigns of the Company pursuant to the terms thereof; and


 


WHEREAS, the company which will
become the parent corporation of the Company pursuant to the formation of the holding company structure has agreed to assume and
perform the Company’s obligations under the Employment Agreement after the consummation of the holding company transaction;
and


 


WHEREAS, the parties to the
Employment Agreement wish there to be no confusion or ambiguity as to the consequences of the holding company transaction and the
succession of the parent corporation to the obligations of the Company thereunder; 


 


NOW THEREFORE, the parties to
the Employment Agreement acknowledge and agree that the creation of a holding company structure was not intended to be a Change of
Control within the meaning of the Employment Agreement and that the correct interpretation of the language of the Employment
Agreement is that such creation of a holding company structure and the consequences thereof do not constitute a Change of Control
within the meaning of the Employment Agreement, and that the Effective Date will not occur by reason thereof; and


 


Furthermore, Employee consents
to the assignment of the Employment Agreement by the Company to the parent corporation of the Company following the consummation
of the holding company transaction pursuant to Section 251(g) of the Delaware Corporation Law (currently named Hecla Holdings
Inc., but to be renamed Hecla Mining Company upon the consummation of the Section 251(g) transaction).


 





	
             
 	
            DATED this 8th day of November 2006.
 





 





	
            EXECUTIVE
 	
            HECLA MINING COMPANY
 
	 
	
            ___________________________
 	
            By: _____________________________
 
	
            Name:
 	
                    Name:
 
	
            Title:
 	
                    Title:
EX-10.III.A



 







    EXHIBIT 10(iii)(A)



 



    July 24, 2006



 



    Mr. Nicholas J. Camera




    The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc.




    1114 Avenue of the Americas




    New York, NY 10036



 



    Dear Nick:



 



    As you know, I have been deferring my director fees for the past
    several years. Commencing January 1, 2007, I wish to begin
    receiving my director fees on a current basis.



 



    Very truly yours,



 



    /s/  Richard
    A. Goldstein





    

    52
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, George H. Ellis, certify that:

1.      I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q of SoftBrands, Inc.;

2.      Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.      Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.      TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:

a)      Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the Registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)     Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)      Disclosedin this report any change in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theRegistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theRegistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.      TheRegistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theRegistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a)      Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

b)     Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 
| /s/ George H. Ellis                    |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| George H. Ellis                        |
| *Chairman and Chief Executive Officer* |
|                                   |
| October 5, 2005                        |

 

----
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. PD-0474-18

ADRIAN JEROME PARKER, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS

GREGG COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Appellant, Adrian Jerome Parker, was convicted of four offenses. One of those

offenses was engaging in organized criminal activity by conspiring to commit the offense of

possession with intent to deliver between 4 and 200 grams of a controlled substance. This

1

 The other three offenses (not at issue here) included: possession with intent to deliver a 1

controlled substance, cocaine, in an amount of 4 grams or more, but less than 200 grams (Count

II); tampering with evidence (Count III); and possession with intent to deliver a controlled

substance, cocaine, in an amount of one gram or more, but less than 4 grams (Count IV). He was

sentenced to forty-five years’ imprisonment on Count II and to twenty years’ imprisonment on

each of Count III and Count IV— with all sentences to run concurrently. 
conviction was based on § 71.02(a)(5) of the Texas Penal Code.

2

Parker appealed that conviction, arguing that the evidence was insufficient because

possession with intent to deliver is not a valid predicate offense for engaging in organized

criminal activity. The court of appeals agreed and rendered an acquittal. The court of

3

appeals stated that it did not reform the conviction to reflect a lesser-included offense

because “no greater-inclusive offense” existed and therefore there could “be no lesserincluded offense.”

4

This Court initially granted the State Prosecuting Attorney’s petition for discretionary

review to examine that holding. Having examined the record and the briefs, we now

conclude that our decision to grant review was improvident. We therefore dismiss the SPA’s

petition for discretionary review as improvidently granted.

Delivered: March 11, 2020

Do not publish

See TEX. PENAL CODE § 71.02(a)(5) (listing as a predicate for engaging in organized 2

criminal activity: “unlawful manufacture, delivery, dispensation, or distribution of a controlled

substance or dangerous drug, or unlawful possession of a controlled substance or dangerous drug

through forgery, fraud, misrepresentation, or deception”). 

Parker v. State, No. 06-17-00167-CR, 2018 WL 1733969 (Tex. App.—Texarkana Apr. 3

11, 2018) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

Id. at *4 n.8. 4
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Migdalia Rosa, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered September 27, 1988, convicting her of grand larceny in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The prosecutor’s summation was a fair response to the defense counsel’s summation *(see, People v Gavins,*118 AD2d 582). Defense counsel made the credibility of the complaining witness the central focus of her summation. Under the circumstances, the prosecutor’s comments did not constitute improper bolstering. Moreover, the remarks neither shifted the burden of proof nor appealed to juror sympathy. Rather, the prosecutor’s remarks represented a fair response to defense counsel’s summation *(see, People v Lilly,*139 AD2d 671).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the facts of this case do not amount to a "rare case” where the sentence imposed is unconstitutionally harsh as applied *(see, People v Broadie,*37 NY2d 100, 119, *cert denied*423 US 950; *People v Serviss,*137 AD2d 637; *People v Donovan,*89 AD2d 968, *affd*59 NY2d 834; *cf., People v Robinson,*68 AD2d 413). Brown, J. P., Kooper, Eiber and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

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

     I, Robert deRose, Chief Executive Officer of Education Lending Group, Inc.
(the "Company"), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.   The Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ending
December 31, 2002 (the "Annual 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 or
78o(d)); and

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

Date:  March 31, 2003                     By:    /s/ Robert deRose
                                                 ------------------
                                          Name:  Robert deRose
                                          Title: Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of North Penn Bancorp, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Frederick L. Hickman, President and 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:


          (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 the Company.




Date:         November 14, 2006            /s/ Frederick L. Hickman
              ----------------------       -------------------------------------
                                           Frederick L. Hickman
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 90 (Wednesday, May 8, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 20867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11380]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT


Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Reclearance of 
Information Collection--SF 2809

AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public 
Law 104-13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of 
Personnel Management intends to submit to the Office of Management and 
Budget a request for reclearance of the following information 
collection. SF 2809, Health Benefits Registration Form, is used by 
annuitants under Federal retirement systems other than the Civil 
Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System 
and by the former spouses of Federal employees and annuitants to 
register for enrollment in the Federal Employees Health Benefits 
Program. SF 2809 is also used by these persons to change enrollments 
within the FEHBP. SF 2809 is needed to verify entitlement and to effect 
premium withholdings
    Approximately 9,000 SF 2809 forms will be processed each year from 
former spouses and annuitants from other retirement systems. Each form 
takes approximately 45 minutes to complete. The annual estimated burden 
is 6,750 hours
    For copies of this proposal, contact Jim Farron on (202) 418-3208, 
or E-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f993949f988b8b9697b994989095d7968994d79e968f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a5cfc8c3c4d7d7cacbe5c8c4ccc98bcad5c88bc2cad3">[email protected]</span></a>

DATES: Comments on this proposal should be received on or before July 
7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to: Kenneth H. Glass, Chief, 
Insurance Operations Division, Retirement and Insurance Service, U.S. 
Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW, Room 3415, 
Washington, DC 20415-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION CONTACT: 
Mary Beth Smith-Toomey, Management Services Division, (202) 606-0623.

U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Lorraine A. Green,
Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. 96-11380 Filed 5-7-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325-01-M

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Charles Edward TAYLOR, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 06-94-00222-CR.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Texarkana.

Argued April 25, 1995.

Decided May 2, 1995.

*373Ebb B. Mobley, Longview, for appellant.

C. Patrice Savage, Asst. Dist. Atty., Long-view, for appellee.

Before CORNELIUS, C.J., and BLEIL and GRANT, JJ.

OPINION

BLEIL, Justice.

Charles Taylor appeals from his conviction for the offense of possession of a controlled substance, complaining that the trial court erred in permitting him to represent himself at trial. We affirm the judgment.

Taylor was indicted in May 1994. Robert Nisbett served as Taylor’s defense counsel until July 8, 1994, when Taylor orally requested that he be permitted to represent himself at trial. The trial court granted Taylor’s request, but appointed Nisbett as standby counsel. The trial began approximately two weeks later. In the midst of cross-examining the State’s first witness, Taylor relinquished his right to self-representation and asked that Nisbett act as his legal counsel. Taylor and his attorney agreed to stipulate to the evidence and, after being given the proper admonishments by the court, Taylor changed his plea to guilty.

Where there is no plea bargain and a guilty plea is voluntarily and understandingly made, all nonjurisdictional defects, including claimed deprivations of federal due process, are waived. *Shallhorn v. State,*732 S.W.2d 636, 637 (Tex.Crim.App.1987); *Helms v. State,*484 S.W.2d 925, 927 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972). Taylor entered an open plea of guilty and does not attack the voluntariness of that plea on appeal. Taylor has waived any error regarding the trial court’s decision to permit him to represent himself.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

GRANT, Justice,

concurring.

Taylor contends that he was not properly represented by counsel. It is fundamental in Texas law that a guilty plea rendered without the effective assistance of counsel is not a voluntary knowledgeable act. *Ex parte Harris,*596 S.W.2d 893 (Tex.Crim.App.1980). Therefore, to say that Taylor’s “voluntarily and understandably made” guilty plea waives his challenge to a lack of representation does not address the issue in the case.

I concur in the results because there is no showing that Taylor’s self-representation affected the outcome of his case in any maimer. His standby counsel became his active counsel at Taylor’s request when Taylor relinquished his right to self-representation. It was at this point that Taylor and his attorney withdrew his not guilty plea, agreed to stipulate the evidence, and entered a plea of guilty. Thus, Taylor had counsel at all times pertinent to the disposition of the case by the plea of guilty. Taylor did not demonstrate that his plea of guilty was compelled by his lack of representation and that he did not knowingly waive his right to counsel under *Faretta v. California,*422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975). Thus, he did not show that harmful error was committed by the trial court.