alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 07-11-0264-CR 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AMARILLO 

PANEL A 

JULY 13, 2012 

______________________________ 

CEDRIZ ALPHONSO BERKLEY, JR., APPELLANT 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

_________________________________ 

FROM THE 27TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY; 

NO. 66,650; HONORABLE JOE CARROLL, JUDGE 

_______________________________ 

Before CAMPBELL and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Appellant, Cedriz Alphonso Berkley, Jr., pled guilty in open court to aggravated 

assault with a deadly weapon.1

 He was sentenced to fifteen years confinement. In a 

single issue, Appellant asserts the trial court erred by including in its written judgment a 

requirement that he pay $26,383.94 in restitution when the trial court’s oral sentencing 

pronouncement did not refer to the payment of any restitution. The State, with 

 

1

See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 22.02(a)(2) (West 2011). 
2 

commendable candor, concedes the trial court erred and asks this Court to modify the 

judgment by deleting the order for payment of restitution. 

 The record reflects that, at a punishment and sentencing hearing held on May 

12, 2011, the trial court pronounced that Appellant was sentenced to fifteen years 

confinement without any mention of restitution. The statute authorizing restitution, Tex. 

Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.037(a) (West Supp. 2011) provides that a trial court may 

order a convicted defendant to make restitution to a victim of the offense "[i]n addition to 

any fine imposed by law." An order to pay restitution is part of the convicted 

defendant's punishment. Weir v. State, 278 S.W.3d 364, 366 (Tex.Crim.App. 2009); Ex

parte Cavazos, 203 S.W.3d 333, 338 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006) (original proceeding); Cabla 

v. State, 6 S.W.3d 543, 545 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999). A defendant’s sentence must be 

pronounced in the defendant’s presence. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.03(a) 

(West Supp. 2011). When the oral pronouncement of sentence and the written 

judgment differ, the oral pronouncement controls. Ex parte Huskins, 176 S.W.3d 818, 

820 (Tex.Crim.App. 2005). Therefore, an order of restitution must be included in the 

oral pronouncement of sentence to be included in the written judgment. Lane v. State, 

No. 12-11-00071-CR, 2012 Tex.App. LEXIS 3389, at *5-6 (Tex.App.--Tyler April 30, 

2012, no pet.) (not designated for publication); Sauceda v. State, 309 S.W.3d 767, 769 

(Tex.App.—Amarillo 2010, pet. ref’d); Alexander v. State, 301 S.W.3d 361, 364 

(Tex.App.--Fort Worth 2009, no pet.). Because the trial court did not include restitution 

in its oral pronouncement of sentence, it could not assess restitution in its written 

judgment. Accordingly, we find the trial court erred and “the proper remedy is to 
3 

modify the judgment to delete the order of restitution.” Sauceda, 309 S.W.3d at 769. 

Appellant’s single issue is sustained. 

Conclusion 

 The trial court’s judgment is modified to delete the portion requiring restitution 

and, in all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. 

 Patrick A. Pirtle 

 Justice 

Do not publish.
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14 OR 15D-14 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Scott Elgood, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Transglobal Mining Corp;



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-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:



a)

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;



b)

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



c)

presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



5.

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 functions):



a)

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



b)

any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and



6.

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.



Date:  February 5, 2008





Transglobal Mining Corp.





By:

/s/Scott Elgood



Scott Elgood, President

(Principal Executive Officer, and

Principal Financial Officer
Douglas 

Accordingly, having considered the petition and the 

supporting documentation, we conclude that Lund's offense does not 

warrant the imposition of a temporary suspension or referral to the 

disciplinary board at this time. 

It is so ORDERED. 

7t.144 

Hardesty 

cc: State Bar of Nevada/Las Vegas 

Benjamin R. Lund 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A e
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM RELIANT
BUILDING PRODUCTS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED APRIL 2, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-02-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-02-1999
<CASH>                                             851
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,048
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,717
<INVENTORY>                                     19,220
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                51,282
<PP&E>                                          63,045
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,742
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 243,655
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,399
<BONDS>                                        183,877
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      4,664
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   243,655
<SALES>                                        281,737
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               281,737
<CGS>                                          216,276
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  216,276
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,684
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,567
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,245)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,947)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (13,298)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,298)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Charles HEEGER, Emily Heeger, Albert Heeger, and Ruth Heeger, Appellants, v. Benjamin LAMKE, Ethel Lamke, Daniel Strait, Deborah Strait, Margie Jonell Berger, and Margaret Berger, Respondents.

No. 55196.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

May 23, 1989.

Timothy J. Melenbrink, Union, for appellants.

Lamke, Benjamin, Ethel, & Strait, Daniel, Union, for respondents.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the trial court’s judgment in a quiet title action. The trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. *Murphy v. Carron,*536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976).

An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-38643), as amended,  pertaining to the 1997 Equity Incentive Plan of
BEI  Technologies,  Inc., of our report dated October 29, 2002,  with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of BEI Technologies, Inc. and
subsidiaries,  included  in the  Annual  Report  (Form  10-K) for the year ended
September 28, 2002.


                                                    Ernst & Young LLP


San Francisco, California
Date October 29, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 737 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 737

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 14, 2009.
Whereas Hispanic-Serving Institutions play an important role in educating many 
        underprivileged students and helping them attain their full potential 
        through higher education;
Whereas there are currently about 268 Hispanic-Serving Institutions in the 
        United States;
Whereas Hispanic-Serving Institutions are actively involved in stabilizing and 
        improving their communities;
Whereas celebrating the vast contributions of Hispanic-Serving Institutions 
        contributes to the strength and culture of our Nation;
Whereas the achievements and goals of Hispanic-Serving Institutions are 
        deserving of national recognition; and
Whereas the week of September 20th would be an appropriate week for such 
        recognition: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the achievements and goals of Hispanic-Serving 
        Institutions across the country;
            (2) supports the designation of an appropriate week as ``National 
        Hispanic-Serving Institutions Week'';
            (3) requests the President to issue a proclamation designating such 
        week; and
            (4) calling on the people of the United States and interested groups 
        to observe such week with appropriate ceremonies, activities, and 
        programs to demonstrate support for Hispanic-Serving Institutions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 739 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 739

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 30, 2009.
Whereas the United States honors Norman E. Borlaug as an Iowan, humanitarian, 
        and father of the ``Green Revolution'';
Whereas Dr. Borlaug was born on March 25, 1914, and grew up on a family farm 
        outside Cresco, Iowa;
Whereas Dr. Borlaug attended the University of Minnesota, where he received B.A. 
        and Ph.D. degrees and was also a star NCAA wrestler;
Whereas, for over 20 years, Dr. Borlaug was a member of the faculty of Texas A&M 
        University;
Whereas Dr. Borlaug spent 20 years working in the poorest areas of rural Mexico 
        where he made his breakthrough achievement in developing a strain of 
        wheat that could exponentially increase yields while actively resisting 
        disease;
Whereas Dr. Borlaug's ``green revolution'' uplifted hundreds of thousands of the 
        rural poor in Mexico and saved hundreds of millions from famine and 
        outright starvation in India and Pakistan;
Whereas Dr. Borlaug's approach to wheat production next spread throughout the 
        Middle East, and soon his approach was adapted to rice growing, 
        increasing the number of lives Dr. Borlaug has been credited to saving 
        to more than a billion people;
Whereas in 1970, Dr. Borlaug received the Nobel Peace Prize, the only person 
        working in agriculture to ever be so honored, and since then he has 
        received numerous honors and awards, including the Presidential Medal of 
        Freedom, the Public Service Medal, the National Academy of Sciences' 
        highest honor, the Rotary International Award for World Understanding 
        and Peace, and the Congressional Gold Medal;
Whereas, up until his death on September 12, 2009, Dr. Borlaug continued to work 
        to alleviate poverty and malnutrition throughout the world;
Whereas Dr. Borlaug created the World Food Prize in 1986, which is the ``Nobel 
        Prize for Food and Agriculture'' and which has honored Laureates from 
        Bangladesh, India, China, Mexico, Denmark, Sierra Leone, Switzerland, 
        the United Kingdom, and the United States;
Whereas the headquarters of the World Food Prize is located in Des Moines, Iowa; 
        and
Whereas Dr. Borlaug's humanitarian works have made him an American hero who will 
        never be forgotten: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors the life and achievements 
of Dr. Norman E. Borlaug for his many contributions to alleviating world hunger.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Exhibit 10.2


 


WAIVER


 


In consideration for the benefits I will receive as a result of my
employer’s participation in the United States Department of the Treasury’s TARP
Capital Purchase Program, I hereby voluntarily waive any claim against the
United States or my employer for any changes to my compensation or benefits
that are required to comply with the regulation issued by the Department of the
Treasury as published in the Federal Register on October 20, 2008.


 


I acknowledge that this regulation may require modification of the
compensation, bonus, incentive and other benefit plans, arrangements, policies
and agreements (including so-called “golden parachute” agreements) that I have
with my employer or in which I participate as they relate to the period the
United States holds any equity or debt securities of my employer acquired
through the TARP Capital Purchase Program.


 


This waiver includes all claims I may have under the laws of the United
States or any state related to the requirements imposed by the aforementioned
regulation, including without limitation a claim for any compensation or other
payments I would otherwise receive, any challenge to the process by which this
regulation was adopted and any tort or constitutional claim about the effect of
these regulations on my employment relationship.


 


 


	
   

  	
  EXECUTIVE:

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  
	
   

  	
  Date: February 13, 2009
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY

In connection with the quarterly report of Infolinx
Communications Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10QSB for the fiscal period ending
August 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Matthew Jones, President. 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.

/s/ Matthew Jones

Name: Matthew Jones Title: President September 30,
2008

---
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 Annual Report of HopFed Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending
December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John E. Peck, 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 the result of operations of the Company.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|Date: March 31, 2011                 
|                                     
|/s/ John E. Peck                     
|John E. Peck, Chief Executive Officer

A signed original
of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to HopFed Bancorp, Inc. and will be retained by HopFed Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. The information
furnished herein shall not be deemed to be filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933.
#### Debra A. TERRY, Appellant, v. Elliott C. CALDWELL, Appellee.

No. C14-92-00351-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.).

Feb. 11, 1993.

Rehearing Denied March 18, 1993.

Dianne Richards, Clifford A. Wilson, Houston, for appellant.

Randell B. Wilwhite, Houston, for appel-lee.

Before ROBERTSON, CANNON and BOWERS, JJ.

OPINION

CANNON, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order granting a motion to modify in a suit affecting a parent-child relationship. We affirm.

The parties are parents of a three-year-old child. When the child was six months old, appellee filed a petition to voluntarily legitimate his son. The court entered an order establishing him as the father and possessory conservator of the child. Appellant was named managing conservator.

Appellee subsequently filed a motion to modify seeking to become managing conservator. There was no service of process by citation or an express written waiver of citation of the motion. Appellant, however, signed an agreed judgment that the trial court entered on December 27, 1991.

*876Appellant filed a motion for new trial. At the hearing on the motion she testified she signed the agreed order because appel-lee had misrepresented facts to her about his ability to care for their son.

Appellant attacks the order granting modification in five points of error. In the first three points of error she contends the trial court erred in entering the order because there was no citation, no written waiver of citation, and no appearance. In her fourth point of error, she argues the trial court erred, for the same reasons, in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment may not be rendered against any defendant except with service, acceptance of waiver of process, or appearance by the defendant. Tex.R.Civ.P. 124. “An appearance constitutes waiver [of service].” *Dodson v. Seymour,*664 S.W.2d 158, 161 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1983, no writ). We hold that appellant “appeared” when she signed an agreed order that was entered by the court.

The policy underlying Rule 124 is to assure the defendant knows about the proceedings and can, therefore, defend against them. Appellant knew of the proceedings but chose to sign an agreed order rather than to defend. We overrule points of error one through four.

In point of error five, appellant argues the trial court erred because it held no hearing to ascertain if the modification was in the best interests of the child. Although the family code provides the trial court must ascertain the best interests of the child, it does not require the court to hold an evidentiary hearing to ascertain that best interest. Tex.Fam.Code Ann. §§ 14.-06(b), 14.07(a).

We overrule point of error five and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 19, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 31168]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15545]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[NAFTA-00992]


Crown Pacific Limited Partnership, Albeni Falls, Oldtown, Idaho; 
Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Title V of the North American Free Trade Agreement 
Implementation Act (P.L. 103-182) concerning transitional adjustment 
assistance, hereinafter called (NAFTA-TAA), and in accordance with 
Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273), an investigation was initiated on 
April 22, 1996 in response to a petition filed on behalf of workers at 
Crown Pacific Limited Partnership, Albeni Falls, Oldtown, Idaho.
    The petitioning worker group is already covered under a previous 
active certification (NAFTA-00477). Consequently, further investigation 
in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been 
terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 7th day of June 1996.
Curtis K. Kooser,
Acting Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of 
Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 96-15545 Filed 6-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M