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

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 253 

Honoring Ms. Lois Burton for setting an example for all women through 

her influence and dedication to the Choctaw Nation and to improved 

health care and education in honor of Women’s History Month. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 17, 2009 

Mr. BOREN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring Ms. Lois Burton for setting an example for all 

women through her influence and dedication to the Choctaw Nation and to improved health care and education 

in honor of Women’s History Month. 

Whereas Lois Burton was committed to the education and excellence of the students of Eastern Oklahoma through 

her service on the Jones Academy Board of Educaiton; 

Whereas Ms. Burton was a dedicated advocate of improved 

health care evident through her work with the Health 

Clinic of Poteau, Oklahoma, her service to the Board of 

the Choctaw Nation Hospital, and her work to establish 

the Pharmacy Refill Center at the Health Clinic in 

Poteau, Oklahoma; 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 253 IH 

Whereas Ms. Burton was devoted to the Choctaw Nation; 

named Outstanding Elder of the Choctaw Nation in 2002 

and served as a Tribal Judge; and 

Whereas the life of Ms. Burton continues to influence and 

impact the lives of the Choctaw women and Oklahoma 

women: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors Lois Burton as an extraordinary ex3 ample for all women in recognition of Women’s His4 tory Month; 

5 (2) commends Lois Burton for her dedication to 

6 the Choctaw Nation; and 

7 (3) praises Lois Burton for her advocacy of im8 proved health care and education in Oklahoma. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 32**

**CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERAND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned,being the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer ofVenoco, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Issuer”), hereby certify thatthe report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of the Issuer for the quarter endedMarch 31, 2007, which accompanies this certification, fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theIssuer.
| /s/ Timothy M. Marquez                 |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|
| Timothy M. Marquez                     |   |
| *Chief Executive Officer and Chairman* |   |
| May 15, 2007                      |   |
|                                   |   |
| /s/ Timothy A. Ficker                  |   |
| Timothy A. Ficker                      |   |
| *Chief Financial Officer*              |   |
| May 15, 2007                      |   |

 

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Angel Acevedo, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lagaña, J.), rendered June 15, 1988, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We find that the defendant was not deprived of a fair trial by reason of the prosecutor’s remarks during summation. At trial, witnesses testified that the defendant and the victim were engaged in an altercation on the street, which apparently had been provoked by the victim. The defendant went into the house and returned with a car jack. He struck the victim with the car jack, on the side of her body and on her head. When the victim’s son came to her aid, the defendant struck him with the car jack. Although the prosecutor’s comments regarding the credibility of the defense witnesses, as well as her reference to the indictment, were improper (see, *People v Blowe,*130 AD2d 668; *People v Farmer,*122 AD2d 801; *People v Ricchiuti,*93 AD2d 842), the improprieties were rendered harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see, *People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230, 242).

The defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review his objections to the prosecutor’s alleged bolstering of her witnesses (see, *People v Nuccie,*57 NY2d 818; *People v Yaghnam,*135 AD2d 763; *People v Gonzalez,*102 AD2d 895). We find that review in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction is not warranted in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt.

Finally, the defendant’s contention that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or excessive is without merit (see, *People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302; *People v Nance,*118 AD2d 664; *People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 23.2
CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-1 No.333-114451 and Forms S-3 Nos. 333-82934, 333-89840, 333-105288 and 333-110197) of IntraBioticsPharmaceuticals, Inc. and in the related prospectuses, and in the Registration Statements (FormsS-8 Nos. 333-40524, 333-65616, 333-101632, 333-108096 and 333-117140) pertaining to the Amended andRestated 1995 Stock Option Plan, the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan, the 2000 Employee Stock PurchasePlan, the 2002 Non-Officer Equity Incentive Plan and option agreements with Kathleen D. LaPorte andErnest Mario Ph.D., of IntraBiotics Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our report dated February 6, 2004,with respect to the 2003 and 2002 financial statements of IntraBiotics Pharmaceuticals, Inc.included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.
                    /s/ ERNST & YOUNG, LLP
Palo Alto, California
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





In connection with the quarterly report of Frontier Beverage Company, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending June 30, 2014 (the “Report”), I, William Coogan, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ William Coogan





Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer


September 2, 2014





This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Order entered February 11, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00166-CR

RAFAEL H. HERNANDEZ-BLANCO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-82676-08

ORDER

The Court has received appellant’s notice of appeal from the trial court’s order denying 

him the relief sought by his article 11.072 application for writ of habeas corpus. This is an 

accelerated appeal under Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 31. The case information sheet 

filed by the Collin County District Clerk’s Office reflects that appellant is represented by 

retained counsel.

We ORDER the Collin County District Clerk to file, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the 

date of this order, either the clerk’s record or written verification that appellant has not paid for 

the record. The clerk’s record shall contain the trial court’s written order ruling on appellant’s 

article 11.072 application for writ of habeas corpus and the trial court’s certification of 

appellant’s right to appeal. We notify appellant that if we receive verification of non-payment, 
we will, without further notice, dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See TEX. R. APP. P.

37.3(b).

We ORDER Kim Tinsley, official court reporter of the 401st Judicial District Court, to 

file, within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order, either: (1) the reporter’s record of the 

December 17, 2014 hearing on appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus; or (2) written 

verification that appellant has not paid for the reporter’s record. We notify appellant that if we 

receive verification of non-payment, we will submit the appeal without the reporter’s record. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c).

We ORDER appellant to file his brief by MARCH 18, 2015. We ORDER the State to 

file its brief by APRIL 8, 2015. If any party does not file its brief by the date specified, the 

appeal will be submitted without that party’s brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 31.1.

The appeal will be submitted without oral argument on May 8, 2015 to a panel consisting 

of Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Brown. See TEX. R. APP. P. 31.2, 39.1.

We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the 

Honorable Mark Rusch, Presiding Judge, 401st Judicial District Court; Kim Tinsley, official 

court reporter, 401st Judicial District Court; Andrea Stroh Thompson, Collin County District 

Clerk; and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
This opinion is subject to administrative correction before final disposition.

Before HACKEL, PENNIX , and BLOSSER Appellate Military Judges

_________________________ 

### UNITED STATES Appellee

v. Dominic I. PANTOVICH Lance Corporal (E

- 3 ), U.S. Marine Corps Appellant
No. 202300297

_________________________ Decided: 26 January 2024 Appeal from the United States Navy

- Marine Corps Trial Judiciary Military Judge : A dam J. Workman Sentence adjudged 15 August 2023 by a special court

- martial convened at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune , North Carolina, consisting of a military judge sitting alone

. Sentence in the Entry of Judgment : reduction to E

- 1, confinement for five months , and a bad

- conduct discharge

. 1 For Appellant: Commander Kyle Calvin Kneese , JAGC, USN

1 Appellant was credited with 98 days of pretrial confinement

.United States v. Pantovich , NMCCA No. 202300297 Opinion of the Court

2 _________________________ This opinion does not serve as binding precedent under NMCCA Rule of Appellate Procedure 30.2 (a)

.

_________________________
PER CURIAM : After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of error, and Appellant having not challenged the factual sufficiency of this case, we have determined that the findings are correct in law, the sentence is correct in law and fact, an d that no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. 2 T he findings and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT:

MARK K. JAMISON Clerk of Court

2 Articles 59 & 66, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859, 866. We note that the military judge failed to announce the assembly of the special court

- martial. While this was error, we find it was not a jurisdictional defect. Appellant does not allege prejudice and we find none. See United States v. Goodwin , 60 M.J. 849, 850 (N

- M. Ct. Crim. App. 2005) (“Our superior court has held that violations of Article 16, UCMJ, are not jurisdictional, so long as there is ‘ substantial compliance ’ with its requirements. Thus, such errors must be tested for prejudice.”) ( i nternal citations and punctuation omitted).
#### Kenneth LAND, Martha Land, and Kendra Land, Movants, v. Wilbur A. EDWARDS, Johnetta Haselden, and Agway Insurance Company, Respondents.

No. 92-SC-665-D.

Supreme Court of Kentucky.

May 21, 1993.

As Amended, June 10, 1993.

*ORDER DENYING DISCRETIONARY REVIEW*

PRIOR REPORT 851 S.W.2d 484.

The motion for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals is denied.

STEPHENS, C.J., REYNOLDS, SPAIN and WINTERSHEIMER, JJ„ concur.

LAMBERT J., would grant.

LEIBSON, J., dissents by separate opinion in which COMBS, J., joins.

ENTERED May 21, 1993.

/s/ Robert F. Stephens Chief Justice

LEIBSON, Justice,

dissenting.

Respectfully, I dissent from the decision of our Court to deny discretionary review, permitting the Court of Appeals’ Opinion in this case to be published.

This is a case involving major issues of institutional importance for at least three reasons:

1) The case involves substantial questions regarding the constitutionality of a statute having a major impact on the trial of many cases, and the Judicial Article intends for the Kentucky Supreme Court, not the Court of Appeals, to decide questions of this nature.

2) The Court of Appeals defers to a statute enacted by the General Assembly to prescribe that certain evidence will be an “admissible fact” in “all actions for damages” in this Commonwealth (KRS 411.-188). This is a question of relevancy heretofore within the exclusive province of the judiciary and covered by the collateral source rule excluding such evidence as irrelevant. The Court of Appeals begs off from deciding whether this statute violates the doctrine of separation of powers on “comity” grounds. Our Court, and our Court alone, has the administrative responsibility for deciding for the judiciary when a statute, if unconstitutional, should be embraced for reasons of “comity.”

3)This case will be cited to our Court as precedent in future cases involving the constitutionality of other aspects of the 1988 Kentucky Tort Reform Act, issues which have already surfaced but not yet reached this Court. Our Court, not the Court of Appeals, should set the direction for cases to follow.

Given a case of such obvious importance within the judicial institution, there is no justification for denying review. Our Court is charged with the responsibility for institutional review of cases of this type and this magnitude.

How this case would be decided by our Court, important as this is, is not nearly as important as having it heard and decided by our Court. We have made a serious mistake in delegating our responsibility for deciding this matter to the Court of Appeals.

COMBS, J., joins.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A22A1475. JUHWON SIMMONS v. THE STATE.

After pleading guilty in 2016 to two counts of trafficking of personsfor sexual

servitude and two counts of pimping for person under 18, Juhwon Simmons filed a

motion for out-of-time appeal in 2021. In March 2022, the trial court dismissed the

motion for lack of jurisdiction, and Simmons filed this appeal.

InCook v. State, the Supreme Court determined that a trial court lacks authority

to grant an out-of-time appeal. Cook v. State, 313 Ga. 471, 506 (5) (870 SE2d 758)

(2022). Simmons, therefore, “had no right to file a motion for an out-of-time appeal

in the trial court; hisremedy, if any, liesin habeas corpus.” Rutledge v. State, 313 Ga.

460, 461 (870 SE2d 720) (2022).

Thus, the trial court correctly determined that it did not have jurisdiction to

consider Simmons’s motion for out-of-time appeal, and the court’s order dismissing

the motion does not present a cognizable basisfor an appeal. See Henderson v. State,

303 Ga. 241, 244 (2) (811 SE2d 388) (2018). Accordingly, this appeal is hereby

DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

June 09, 2022

06/09/2022
EXHIBIT31.2

ORMAT FUNDING CORP.CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Connie Stechman, certify that as of the date hereof:

1. Ihave reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ormat FundingCorp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this quarterly report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented inthis quarterly report;

4. The registrant's othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this quarterly report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this quarterly report any change inthe registrant's internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal year that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant's Board of Directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

(a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role inthe registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 11, 2005

|        |  |                        |  |                               |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|--------|--|------------------------|--|-------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|
|   |  | By:/s/ CONNIE STECHMAN |
|   |  |                   |  | Name: Connie Stechman         |
|   |  |                   |  | Title: Chief FinancialOfficer |
|        |

----
EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the following
Registration Statements Under the Securities Act of 1933 as filed by AdZone
Research, Inc.:

Form S-8 dated January 28, 2002 SEC File No.: 333-81498 Form S-8 dated February
21, 2002 SEC File No.: 333-83130 Form S-8/A dated March 26, 2003 SEC File No.:
333-98289

of our independent auditor's report dated June 23, 2004 (except for Note R as to
which the date is June 25, 2004) on the financial statements of AdZone Research,
Inc. as of March 31, 2004 and 2003 and for each of the two years ended March 31,
2004 and 2003 and for the period from February 28, 2000 (date of inception)
through March 31, 2004, respectively, which report appears in the 2004 Annual
Report on Form 10-KSB/A of AdZone Research, Inc.


                                                       /s/ S. W. Hatfield, CPA
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       S. W. HATFIELD, CPA
Dallas, Texas
October 15, 2004
IIB 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5867 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2024 

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

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 109 Live Oaks Boulevard in Casselberry, Florida, as the ‘‘Colonel Joseph William Kittinger II Post 

Office Building’’. 

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


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5867 RFS

1 SECTION 1. COLONEL JOSEPH WILLIAM KITTINGER II POST 

2 OFFICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 109 Live Oaks Boulevard in 

5 Casselberry, Florida, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Colonel Joseph William Kittinger II Post Office Build7 ing’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Colonel Joseph Wil12 liam Kittinger II Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 23, 

2024. 

Attest: KEVIN F. MCCUMBER, 

Clerk. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 18441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9008]





                Sunshine Act Meetings



Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 1995 / 
Sunshine Act Meetings
[[Page 18441]]


FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION

Farm Credit Administration Board; Regular Meeting.

AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the Government in the 
Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3)), of the forthcoming regular meeting 
of the Farm Credit Administration Board (Board).

DATE AND TIME: The regular meeting of the Board will be held at the 
offices of the Farm Credit Administration in McLean, Virginia, on April 
13, 1995, from 10:00 a.m. until such time as the Board concludes its 
business.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Floyd Fithian, Secretary to the Farm 
Credit Administration Board, (703) 883-4025, TDD (703) 883-4444.

ADDRESSES: Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, 
Virginia 22102-5090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This meeting of the Board will be open to 
the public (limited space available). In order to increase the 
accessibility to Board meetings, persons requiring assistance should 
make arrangements in advance. The matters to be considered at the 
meeting are:

Open Session

A. Approval of Minutes
B. New Business

    1. Regulations
    a. Final Rule on the Association Annual Meeting Information 
Statement [12 CFR Part 620] (Final)
    b. Draft Final Rule Deleting Regulations Identified Through 
Regulatory Burden Initiative [12 CFR Parts 614, 615, 618] (Final).

    2. Other
    a. Employee Health Insurance Liability.
    b. Nondiscrimination in Agency Programs and Activities.

    Dated: April 6, 1995.
Floyd Fithian,
Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board.
[FR Doc. 95-9008 Filed 4-7-95; 2:57 pm]
BILLING CODE 6705-01-P
#### Phillip DRAKE, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 47989.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 3, 1994.

*561Robert E. Steele, Jr., St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before SMART, P.J., and KENNEDY and ULRICH, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Phillip Drake pleaded guilty to the charge of voluntary manslaughter emanating from his wife’s death. He appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).