alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

LEE MANUEL,

Plaintiff(s), CASE NUMBER: 08-14046

HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS

v.

BLAINE LAFLER, Warden, 

STEVEN HARRINGTON, Regular Unit Officer, 

FRANK CHAFFIN, Corrections Officer, and

BRADLEY PEET, Resident Unit Manager,

Defendant(s).

 /

 

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Lee Manuel’s (“Manuel”) “Motion for

Appointment of Counsel.” (Doc. #11). Manuel, a pro se inmate, asks the Court to

appoint counsel because he no longer has access to legal assistance. Manuel asserts

Defendants conspired to violate his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. 

The Court may, but is not obligated to, appoint counsel for indigent inmates in

civil actions. See 28 U.S.C. §1915(e)(1) (“[t]he court may request an attorney to

represent any person unable to afford counsel”) (emphasis added); see also Reneer v.

Sewell, 975 F.2d 258, 261 (6th Cir. 1992) (“The appointment of counsel to civil litigants

is a decision left to the sound discretion of the district court[.]”). Such appointments are

only justified in exceptional cases. See Lavado v. Keohane, 992 F.2d 601, 606 (6th Cir.

1993) (citing Lopez v. Reyes, 692 F.2d 15, 17 (5th Cir. 1982)). 

Whether Manuel’s case is “exceptional” depends on the type of case and his
2

ability to represent himself based on the complexity of the factual and legal issues

involved. Keohane, 992 F.2d at 606 (citations omitted). The appointment of counsel in

a civil case is not a constitutional right, and Manuel’s claims are not so factually and

legally complex that he cannot effectively represent himself. Consequently, there is no

basis for an appointment of counsel.

Manuel’s motion for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

IT IS ORDERED.

s/Victoria A. Roberts 

Victoria A. Roberts

United States District Judge

Dated: December 15, 2008

The undersigned certifies that a copy of this

document was served on the attorneys of

record and Lee Manuel by electronic means

or U.S. Mail on December 15, 2008.

s/Linda Vertriest 

Deputy Clerk
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

AO 435

AZ Form (Rev. )

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

APPEAL CRIMINAL

NON-APPEAL CIVIL

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested )

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

TESTIMONY (

PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

OTHER ( )

VOIR DIRE

OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

OPINION OF COURT

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

SENTENCING

BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

( heck all that apply )

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS

PAPER COPY

14 DAYS

7 DAYS

DAILY

HOURLY

REALTIME E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING ,

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE. 19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.) By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 450 Filed 01/29/19 Page 1 of 1
#### Cheryl Ann HIGHWARDEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 175-93.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.

Jan. 12, 1994.

Rehearing Denied March 9, 1994.

Brian W. Wice, J. Gary Trichter, Houston, for appellant.

John B. Holmes, Jr., Dist. Atty., and Ernest Davila and Bobbie Karmy, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

*OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pled no contest to the misdemeanor offense of driving while intoxicated. Article 6701Í-1, V.A.C.S. This conviction was affirmed by the Houston Court of Appeals [Fourteenth District] in a published opinion. *Highwarden v. State,*846 S.W.2d 479 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.1993]).

We granted discretionary review to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in holding 1) the trial court did not err in denying appellant’s motion to suppress on the grounds appellant failed to produce sufficient evidence she was arrested without a warrant; 2) this Court’s decision in *Heitman v. State,*815 S.W.2d 681 (Tex.Cr.App.1991), has no bearing on matters of procedure in search and seizure claims; 3) the arresting officer’s conclusion, absent proof of his training and experience, that appellant failed unspecified field sobriety tests, provided the trial court with a sufficient basis for concluding probable cause existed for the appellant’s warrantless arrest; and 4) the arresting officer’s conclusion, absent radar calibration, that appellant was speeding provided the trial court with a sufficient basis for concluding reasonable suspicion existed for appellant’s initial detention.

After thoroughly reviewing the record, we find appellant’s petition to be improvidently granted. This decision does not constitute an endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals. *Sheffield v. State,*650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

Accordingly, appellant’s petition is dismissed.

CLINTON, MILLER and MALONEY, JJ., dissent.
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Jermaine RICHMOND, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 66600.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

Nov. 21, 1995.

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

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Stephen D. Hawke, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and PUDLOWSKI and GRIMM, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of second degree murder, first degree robbery, and two counts of armed criminal action. He was sentenced to forty-five years in the Department of Corrections.

*790On appeal, he raises two plain error points concerning the State’s closing argument. Plain errors may be considered “when the court finds that manifest injustice or miscarriage of justice has resulted therefrom.” Rule 30.20.

Here, the evidence of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming. Defendant testified that he went to victim’s house intending to rob him.He admitted he was guilty of robbery and armed criminal action. He told the jury how he wrapped the victim’s hands with a phone cord and handed his accomplice the loaded murder weapon. He said, “The thought crossed my mind that he might shoot him. I just hoped that he didn’t.” No manifest injustice or a miscarriage of justice occurred.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. Rule 30.25(b). The trial court’s, judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 13.2





CERTIFICATION


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the Annual Report of China Southern Airlines Company Limited (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Xu Jie Bo, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, 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: April 29, 2011
By:
/s/ Xu Jie BoName: Xu Jie BoTitle: Chief Financial Officer





* 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 written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 126 (Friday, June 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 33706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16597]


========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules 
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings 
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, 
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency 
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents 
appearing in this section.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / 
Notices

[[Page 33706]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


California Coast Province Advisory Committee (PAC)

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION:  Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The California Coast Province Advisory Committee (PAC) will 
meet from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., on July 17, 1996, for a field trip 
beginning at the Bureau of Land Management, 1695 Heindon Rd., Arcata, 
California; and from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. July 18, 1996, at the 
Trinidad Town Hall, 409 Trinity St., Trinidad, California, for a 
business meeting. Agenda items to be covered on July 17 include: (1) 
Redwood National Park restoration work; (2) McDonald Creek restoration; 
(3) Northcoast estuaries presentation; and (4) Ecotech training 
program. Agenda items on July 18, include: (1) Open public forum; (2) 
H.R. 2712, ``The Northwest Forest Health and Economic Stabilization 
Act'' information presentation; (3) Stewardship Contracting information 
presentation; (4) Draft Redwood Habitat Conservation Plan; (5) Agency 
updates on implementing the Northwest Forest Plan; (6) California 
Biodiversity Council watershed inventory data base; and (7) Coastal 
Salmon Initiative. All California Coast Province Advisory Committee 
meetings are open to the public. Interested citizens are encouraged to 
attend.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions regarding this 
meeting to Daniel Chisholm, USDA, Forest Supervisor, Mendocino National 
Forest, 825 N. Humboldt Avenue, Willows, CA, 95988, (916) 934-3316 or 
Phebe Brown, Province Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, 825 
N. Humboldt Avenue, Willows, CA 95988, (916) 934-3316.

    Dated: June 21, 1996.
Daniel K. Chisholm,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 96-16597 Filed 6-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-FK-M
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 1634** 

WASIM ATA BEY EX REL ERICK SEALEY, an individual , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. J. W. MITCHELL, 1709 VSP, an individual; DAVID A. PATRICK, 0304 YCSO, an individual; THOMAS CHABOT, 5543 YCSO, an individual; JASON STUMP, 4318 YCSO, an individual; DONALD MICKET, 5583 YCSO, an individual; BYRON EVANS, 2231 YCSO, an individual; DONNA MAW, Deputy Commonwealth Attorney, an individual; JAMES LAMPRECHT, Yo rk Magistrate, an individual; STEPHEN A. HUDGINS, Chief Judge, an individual; JEFFREY SHAW, Circuit Judge, an individual; MICHAEL SOBERICK, SR., Judge, an individual , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Newport News
. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 4:15

- cv - 00044

- RAJ

- LRL )

Submitted : August 27, 2015 Decided: August 31, 2015

Before GREGORY, AGEE, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Wasim Ata Bey ex rel Erick Sealey , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Plaintiff Wasim Ata Bey ex rel Erick Sealey (Ata Bey) seeks to appe al the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice his civil action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (2012) for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. This court may exercise jurisdic tion only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 12 91 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 , 545

- 47 (1949). Because the deficiencies identified by the district court may be remedied by the filing of an amended complaint, we conclude that the order Ata Bey seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066

- 67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
#### James E. ALEXANDER, Appellant, v. TENSION ENVELOPE, Respondent.

No. WD 52101.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

June 25, 1996.

Stanley Wiles, Kansas City, for appellant.

Jeffrey O’Connor, Stephanie Warmund, Kansas City, for respondent.

Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and HANNA and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Alexander appeals from the decision of the Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying his claim for workers’ compensation. Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34503-34504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16776]


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


DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Agency Information Collection: Submission for OMB Review; Comment 
Request

AGENCY: Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans 
Affairs.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA), Department of 
Veterans Affairs, has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) the following proposal for the collection of information under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    OMB Control Number: 2900-0162.
    Title and Form Number: Monthly Certification of Flight Training, VA 
Form 22-6553c.

[[Page 34504]]

    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Need and Uses: The form is used by students (veterans, 
servicemembers and reservists) and flight schools to report the hours 
and costs of flight training received and the termination of training.
    Affected Public: Individuals or households, Business or other for-
profit, Not-for-profit institutions.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 6,000 hours.
    Estimated Average Burden Per Respondent: 30 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,000.

ADDRESSES: A copy of this submission may be obtained from Ron Taylor, 
VA Clearance Officer (045A4), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 
Vermont Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273-8015.
    Comments and recommendations concerning the submission should be 
directed to VA's OMB Desk Officer, Allison Eydt, OMB Human Resources 
and Housing Branch, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 
Washington, DC 20503 (202) 395-4650. DO NOT send requests for benefits 
to this address.

DATES: Comments on the information collection should be directed to the 
OMB Desk Officer on or before August 1, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Taylor, VA Clearance Officer 
(045A4), (202) 273-8015.

    Dated: June 24, 1996.

    By direction of the Secretary.
William T. Morgan
Management Analyst.
[FR Doc. 96-16776 Filed 7-01-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P
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

United States of America,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Michael Lacey, et al.,

Defendants.

No. CR-18-00422-001-PHX-DJH

ORDER 

This case is before the Court on its own review. The Speedy Trial time as to counts 

the jury did not reach a verdict started on November 16, 2023. (See Doc. 1978). 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that no later than January 23, 2024, the Government shall

inform the Court whether it intends to proceed to trial on any of the Defendants for any of 

the counts for which the jury did not return a verdict. 

Dated this 10th day of January, 2024.

Honorable Diane J. Humetewa

United States District Judge

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 2025 Filed 01/10/24 Page 1 of 1