alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Wilbur LYNCH, Jr., Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 16124.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two.

Oct. 4, 1989.

*674Gregory C. Wells, Columbia, for movant-appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

PREWITT, Presiding Judge.

Movant entered a plea of guilty to assault in the second degree and was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment. Thereafter he filed a motion under Rule 27.26 seeking to vacate the conviction. Following an evidentiary hearing the trial judge made findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered judgment denying the motion. Movant appeals.1

Movant contends that the trial court’s judgment was erroneous because he was denied effective assistance of counsel before entering the plea in violation of the sixth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution and article I, § 18(a) of the Missouri Constitution. Mov-ant states that his counsel failed to exercise the customary skill and diligence that a reasonably competent attorney would exercise by not requesting prior medical records relating to movant’s mental status and failing to request a second psychiatric evaluation of him. Movant contends that failure to take these steps “prejudiced” his defense of mental disease or defect excluding responsibility and rendered his guilty plea involuntary.

After a plea of guilty, the effectiveness of counsel is relevant only as it affects the voluntariness of the plea. *Wesson v. State,*768 S.W.2d 160, 162 (Mo.App.1989). Movant has the burden of establishing his grounds for relief by a preponderance of the evidence. Rule 27.26(f). In reviewing the trial court’s decision this court is limited to determining whether the findings, conclusions, and judgment were clearly erroneous. Rule 27.26(j). Such findings are clearly erroneous only if a review of the entire record leaves the court with a definite and firm impression that a mistake has been made. *Morris v. State,*765 S.W.2d 724, 725 (Mo.App.1989).

The evidence on the motion consisted of movant’s and his previous attorney’s testimony. There was no evidence that movant suffered from any mental disease or defect at the time of his plea which would have affected his ability to voluntarily make the plea. Movant did not establish that had his attorney proceeded as movant now claims she should have, that there would have been any change in his decision to plead guilty. Nor was it shown that movant was not competent to make the plea.

The trial court properly determined that movant did not sustain the burden of proof *675placed upon him. The trial court’s findings and conclusions were not clearly erroneous,

The judgment is affirmed.

HOGAN and MAUS, JJ., concur.

1

. Although Rule 27.26 was repealed effective January 1, 1988, this proceeding continues to be governed by that Rule as sentence was pronounced prior to January 1, 1988, and movant’s motion was pending prior to that date. Rule 24.035(/).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 17 (Thursday, January 25, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2258-2259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1255]



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

[[Page 2259]]


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
[ID-990-1020-01]


Upper Snake River Districts Advisory Council; Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Resource Advisory Council meeting locations and times.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), 5 U.S.C., the 
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) council 
meeting of the Upper Snake River Districts Advisory Council will be 
held as indicated below. The agenda includes a discussion of laws and 
regulations that pertain to grazing, and a statewide formulation of 
standards and guidelines. All meetings are open to the public. The 
public may present written comments to the council. Each formal council 
meeting will have a time allocated for hearing public comments. The 
public comment period for the council meeting is listed below. 
Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment, and time 
available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. 
Individuals who plan to attend and need further information about the 
meetings, or need special assistance such as sign language 
interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should contact Debra 
Kovar at the Shoshone Resource Area Office, P. O. Box 2-B Shoshone, ID, 
83352, (208) 886-7201.

DATES AND TIMES: Dates are February 2, 1996, BLM Field Office located 
at 15 E 200 S, Burley ID. Time 8:00 am-8:00 pm. Public comment period 
5:00 pm-6:00 pm.
    February 22, 1996, Weston Plaza Convention Center, 1350 Blue Lakes 
Blvd North, Twin Falls, ID. Time 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. Public comment 
period 5:00 pm-6:00 pm.
    March 15, 1996, Federal Building (Room B-23), 250 South 4th Ave., 
Pocatello, ID. Time 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. Public comment period 5:00 pm-
6:00 pm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the council is to advise the 
Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning 
and management issues associated with the management of the public 
lands.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Debra Kovar, Shoshone Resource Area 
Office, P. O. Box 2-B, Shoshone, ID 83352, (208) 886-7201.

    Dated: January 17, 1996.
Janis VanWyhe,
Associate District Manager.
[FR Doc. 96-1255 Filed 1-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-GG-P
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Johnnie HARRIS, Appellant.

No. WD 47909.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 10, 1994.

Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before TURNAGE, P.J., and FENNER and SPINDEN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from a conviction of arson in the first degree, section 569.040, RSMo 1986.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
EXHIBIT 32.6

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER OF

UNIVERSAL CITY FLORIDA HOLDING CO. II

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the quarterly report of Universal City Florida Holding Co. II (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 1, 2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Tracey L. Stockwell, 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:



| | (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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 11, 2007



By:

/s/ TRACEY L. STOCKWELLTracey L. Stockwell Principal Financial Officer




35
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

 

 Before the Court is the parties’ Stipulation to Dismiss (Doc. 21). Pursuant to the 

parties’ stipulation, 

 IT IS ORDERED: 

1. That the Stipulation to Dismiss (Doc. 21) is granted; 

2. That this action is dismissed without prejudice in its entirety; 

3. That each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees; and 

4. That the Clerk of Court shall terminate this action. 

Dated this 23rd day of March, 2018.

Honorable Steven P. Logan

United States District Judge

Travelers Property Casualty Company 

of America, 

 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Village Voice Media Holdings, LLC, 

et al., 

Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. CV-17-03994-PHX-SPL

ORDER 

Case 2:17-cv-03994-SPL Document 22 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 1
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 1 of 7
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 2 of 7
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 3 of 7
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 4 of 7
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 5 of 7
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 6 of 7
Case 4:17-cr-01658-JGZ-DTF Document 1 Filed 10/25/17 Page 7 of 7
**CERTIFICATION**

|         |                                                                                                                                                                            |         |
|--------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|
|         | Date:              August 13, 2007                                                                                                                                              |
|    |                                                                                                                                                                            |    |
|         | /s/                Jerald L. FenstermakerJerald                L. Fenstermaker,President                and Chief Executive Officer(Principal                Executive Officer) |

|         |                                                                                                                                                  |         |
|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|
|         | Date:              August 13,              2007                                                                                                       |
|    |                                                                                                                                                  |    |
|         | /s/                Daniel F. GrahamDaniel                F. Graham,Chief                Financial Officer(Principal                Financial Officer) |
Case 2:17-mj-00447-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/23/17 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-00447-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/23/17 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-00447-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/23/17 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:17-mj-00447-MHB Document 1 Filed 10/23/17 Page 4 of 4
H. Res. 335 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

April 27, 2009. 

Whereas National Volunteer Week will be observed during 

the week of April 19 through April 25, 2009; 

Whereas National Volunteer Week honors the nationwide impact of volunteers in every day American communities; 

Whereas the theme of this year’s National Volunteer Week is 

‘‘Celebrating People in Action’’, which recognizes individuals who dedicate themselves to taking action and solving 

problems in their communities; 

Whereas National Volunteer Week has been an annual celebration since 1974 and every President since that time 

has signed a proclamation honoring National Volunteer 

Week; 

Whereas many State and local officials from around the 

country have actively engaged their communities in celebrating National Volunteer Week; 

Whereas data from the Corporation for National and Community Service shows that 61,803,000 volunteers dedicated 8,003,840,108 hours of service to community organizations in 2008; 

Whereas volunteers can play a critical role in helping struggling nonprofit organizations with fundraising, directing 
2 

•HRES 335 EH 

services to individuals and communities in need, and 

other skill-based assistance; 

Whereas nonprofit organizations are reporting an increase in 

the number of inquiries from both baby boomers and 

young people who are ready to serve our Nation; 

Whereas ‘‘Celebrating People in Action’’ is the recognition 

that every citizen can make a difference in their community by taking action through activities like building a 

ramp to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities, 

tutoring a child struggling to read, serving food at a 

homeless shelter, assisting the unemployed with job readiness skills, and many other services; and 

Whereas National Volunteer Week provides a moment in time 

to honor all those who serve locally, nationally and internationally to change lives, rejuvenate communities, and 

embody the best of the American spirit of responsibility 

and civic engagement: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) supports the goals and ideals of National Volunteer Week; 

(2) recognizes the critical role of our national and 

community service programs; 

(3) honors the contributions of all those hard-working American volunteers who make a difference in their 

communities every day of the year; and 
3 

•HRES 335 EH 

(4) invites all Americans to answer the call to serve 

through volunteerism in any form. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
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, Charles Bland, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Sirenza Microdevices, Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Sirenza Microdevices, Inc.

Date: March 16, 2007



/s/    CHARLES
BLANDName:

Charles BlandTitle:

Chief Financial Officer
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Mark HARRIS, Appellant.

No. WD 39904.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

June 12, 1990.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 31, 1990.

Sean D. O’Brien, Public Defender, Mary F. Clark, Asst. Public Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., William J. Swift, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before MANFORD, P.J., and SHANGLER and CLARK, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from conviction of robbery in the first degree and armed criminal action, and from denial of appellant’s Rule 29.15 motion.

Affirmed. Rule 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 7, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20490-20491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-11326]



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


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 91-137, RM-7494]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Saltville, VA and Jefferson, NC

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; denial of reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: The Chief, Policy and Rules Division denied the petition for 
reconsideration, filed by Smith Communications, Inc., of the Report and 
Order in this proceeding, 56 FR 23260, published May 21, 1991. The 
Chief also affirmed the Report and Order and its use of the 
Commission's standard propagation prediction methodology. The Report 
and Order had granted the petition (RM-7494) of 106.1, Inc. to upgrade 
the construction permit at Saltville from Channel 291A to Channel 
291C3, to reallot it to Jefferson, and to modify its permit to specify 
Jefferson as the new community of license. With

[[Page 20491]]

this action, the proceeding is terminated.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 7, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Bertron Withers, Jr., Mass Media 
Bureau, (202) 418-2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, MM Docket No. 91-137, adopted April 19, 
1996 and released April 30, 1996. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., 
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Services, 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 
20037, (202) 857-3800.

Federal Communications Commission.
Douglas W. Webbink,
Chief, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 96-11326 Filed 5-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-F
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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

         The undersigned, Justin M. MacIntosh, Chief Executive Officer, and
David C. Carlson, Chief Financial Officer, of CorVu Corporation, certify that:

         1. We have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of CorVu
Corporation;

         2. Based on our knowledge, this annual 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
annual report; and

         3. Based on our knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this annual 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 annual report.

         Date:    September 17, 2003.


                                             /s/ Justin M. MacIntosh
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Justin M. MacIntosh
                                             Chief Executive Officer

                                             /s/ David C. Carlson
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             David C. Carlson
                                             Chief Financial Officer


                                       4
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-13-00343-CV

Rick REILEY and Gary K. Weddle,

Appellants

v.

Pleas D. “Beau” ANDERSON, II and Margaret Anderson,

Appellees

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13-0074-CV

Honorable W.C. Kirkendall, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE MARION

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this joint motion to dismiss appeals is 

GRANTED, and this appeal is DISMISSED. The dismissal of this appeal does not alter or affect 

the finality of the trial court’s judgment. Costs of the appeal are taxed against appellants.

SIGNED August 14, 2013.

_________________________________

Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
#### Kathen Roy WYNNE, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent-Respondent.

No. 64031.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 1, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 23, 1994.

Application to Transfer Denied April 26, 1994.

Dave Hemingway, St. Louis, for movant-appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Jennifer A. Glancy, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent-respondent.

Before CRANDALL, P.J. and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Kathen Roy Wynne, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.036 motion without an evidentiary hearing. The judgment of conviction sought to be vacated was for stealing property of a value of $150.00 or more for which movant was sentenced, as a prior and persistent offender, to imprisonment for twelve years.

The judgment of the motion court is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment of the motion court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5868 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5868

 To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to permit the Council 
     of the District of Columbia to enact laws with respect to the 
   organization and jurisdiction of the District of Columbia courts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 2, 2023

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to permit the Council 
     of the District of Columbia to enact laws with respect to the 
   organization and jurisdiction of the District of Columbia courts.

    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 ``District of Columbia Courts Home 
Rule Act''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY OF COUNCIL OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TO ENACT LAWS WITH 
              RESPECT TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS.

    Section 602(a) of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 1-
206.02(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking paragraph (4).
                                 <all>
```