alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23.1
                                                                    ------------


               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We have issued our report dated March 8, 2002 accompanying the consolidated
financial statements of Correctional Services Corporation and Subsidiaries that
are included in the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001. We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the
Registration Statement of Correctional Services Corporation and Subsidiaries on
Form S-8, Registration No. 333-76353, effective April 15, 1999, and Form S-8,
Registration No. 333-16537, effective November 21, 1996.

                                                      /s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


Tampa, Florida
March 8, 2002
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

February 12, 2003 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. THURMAN L. WHITSEY AND 

CHARLIE MAE WHITSEY

Criminal Court for Davidson County

No. 2000-B-1062

No. M2001-03127-CCA-R3-CD - Filed June 3, 2003

AMENDED JUDGMENT

Came the appellants, THURMAN L. WHITSEY and CHARLIE MAE WHITSEY, by

counsel, and the state, by the Attorney General, and this case was heard on the record on appeal from

the Criminal Court of Davidson County; and upon consideration thereof, this court is of the opinion

that our original judgment entered April 23, 2003, should be vacated; that there is reversible error

in the judgments of the trial court relating only to the weapons offense under Count 5; and the case

should be remanded for a resentencing determination relating to appellant, Charlie Mae Whitsey.

It is, therefore, ordered and adjudged by this court that our original judgment dated April 23,

2003, be vacated, and appellant Thurman L. Whitsey’s conviction under Count 5 for unlawful

possession of a weapon and appellant Charlie Mae Whitsey’s conviction under Count 5 for

facilitation of unlawful possession of a weapon are reversed and dismissed. It is further ordered that

the case be remanded for a resentencing determination as to appellant, Charlie Mae Whitsey,

pursuant to our order granting the petition to rehear. The judgments of the trial court are otherwise

affirmed, and the case is remanded to the Criminal Court of Davidson County for a resentencing

determination as to Charlie Mae Whitsey, the execution of the remaining judgments of that court,

and for collection of costs accrued below.

It appears that the appellants are indigent. Costs of appeal will be paid by the State of

Tennessee.

Joe G. Riley, Judge

Joseph M. Tipton, Judge

Thomas T. Woodall, Judge
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

______________________________________________________________________ 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. Case No. 09-20225 

SCOTT SAMONEK, 

Defendant. 

__________________________________/ 

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO VACATE SENTENCE 

AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY 

The Sixth Circuit authorized Scott Samonek to bring a second motion to vacate 

his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which is now before the court. (ECF Nos. 63, 68.) 

This motion, filed in 2016, argues that Defendant should be resentenced based upon 

Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). Specifically, it contends that 

Defendant’s felonious assault conviction no longer qualifies as a predicate offense for a 

career offender enhancement under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines because 

§ 4B1.2(a) is unconstitutionally vague. 

The government filed a response explaining that two subsequent decisions have 

foreclosed this argument. (ECF No. 70.) In Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 

(2017), the Supreme Court held that the Sentencing Guidelines are not subject to 

vagueness challenges and thus § 4B1.2(a) is not void for vagueness. Id. at 892. 

Moreover, in United States v. Harris, 853 F.3d 318 (6th Cir. 2017), the Sixth Circuit held 

that a Michigan conviction for felonious assault is a crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a) 

and thus qualifies as a predicate offense for a career offender enhancement. Id. at 322. 
2 

Defendant filed a reply in which counsel acknowledged his agreement with the 

government that the merits of the § 2255 motion have been undermined by these 

decisions. (ECF No. 71.) 

 Because Defendant’s argument based upon Johnson no longer has merit, the 

court will deny his § 2255 motion. The court will also deny a certificate of appealability 

because jurists of reason would not debate the court’s analysis with respect to 

Defendant’s claim. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483–84 

(2000). Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence (ECF No. 

68) is DENIED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. 

s/Robert H. Cleland / 

ROBERT H. CLELAND 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: March 27, 2019 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record 

on this date, March 27, 2019, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

s/Lisa Wagner / 

 Case Manager and Deputy Clerk 

 (810) 292-6522 

S:\Cleland\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C2 ORDERS\16-14525.SAMONEK.Deny2255.docx
EXHIBIT 32.2


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of School4Chauffeurs, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffery
E. Jones, Secretary/Treasurer 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, 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.


Date: September 13, 2007



                                        By: /s/ JEFFERY E. JONES
                                            ___________________________
                                                Jeffery E. Jones
                                                Secretary/Treasurer
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Xylan Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-3944) on Form S-8 of Xylan Corporation of our report dated January 21, 1998
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Xylan Corporation and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997, and 1996, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997, and related schedule,
which report appears in the December 31, 1997, annual report on Form 10-K of
Xylan Corporation.


                                                   /s/ KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP


Los Angeles, California
March 27, 1998
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3902

To amend the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act

of 1996 to extend the date specified for the transfer of certain amounts

to be available for drinking water State revolving funds from August

1, 1996, to September 30, 1996.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 25, 1996

Mr. DINGELL (for himself, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. STUPAK, and Mrs. LINCOLN)

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations

A BILL

To amend the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 to extend the date specified for

the transfer of certain amounts to be available for drinking water State revolving funds from August 1, 1996,

to September 30, 1996.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DATE FOR TRANSFER OF SRF

4 FUNDS.

5 The first sentence under the heading ‘‘State and

6 Tribal Assistance Grants’’ in the provisions of title III of

7 the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations
2

•HR 3902 IH

1 Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–134) relating to Independ2 ent Agencies under the heading ‘‘Environmental Protec3 tion Agency’’ is amended by striking ‘‘August 1’’ in each

4 place it appears and inserting ‘‘September 30’’.

Æ
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-24-00036-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.E. AND P.E.,

CHILDREN

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from the 322nd District Court

of Tarrant County (322-727064-22)

May 23, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Kerr

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was no error in the trial court’s final order. It is ordered that the trial court’s final 

order is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By _/s/ Elizabeth Kerr__________________

 Justice Elizabeth Kerr
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. M A N U E L P I N E D A - F E RN A N D E Z , a. k. a. Jorge P i neda-F ernand ez , D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 10- 50591 D. C . No . 3 : 1 0 - c r - 0 2 2 7 6 - L AB ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia L a rry A . B urns , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d A pr i l 17, 2012 ** B efo re: L E A V Y , P A E Z , an d B E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. M anuel P i neda-F ernand ez appeal s f rom the 70 -m on th sent ence i m po se d f o llo w in g h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n f o ra tte m p te d e n try a f

te rd e p o r ta tio n , in vi ol a t i on of

8 U . S . C . § 1326. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291, a nd 

# FI LED APR20 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 50591 2 w e a f f i rm. P i ne da - F e rna nde z c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n appl y i ng a 16- l e ve l e nha nc e m e ntunde rU . S . S . G . § 2L 1. 2( b) ( 1) ( A ) , be c aus e a s s aul tw i th a d e a d ly w e ap o n u n d e rs e c tio n 2 4 5 ( a ) o f th e C a lif

o rn iaP e n a l C o d e is n o t a cat eg o ri cal cri m e o f v i o l en ce. T h i s co n t en t i o n i s fo recl o sed b y U ni ted Stat es v. G r aj e da , 58 1 F . 3d 11 86 , 11 97 (9th C i r. 20 09 ). P i neda-F ernand ez ’ s a rgum entthat w e are n o tb o u n d b y G r aj e da i n l i gh tof the subsequentca se of John son v. U ni ted Stat es , 1 3 0 S . C t. 1 2 6 5 ( 2 0 1 0 ) , is w ith o u t m e r it. See N ew do w v. L ef

evre , 598 F . 3d 6 3 8 , 6 4 4 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 1 0 ) ( ath r e e - ju d g e p a n e l m a y ig n o r e c ir c u it p r e c e d e n t o n ly w here i ti s “ cl ea rl y i rr ec on ci l abl e” w i th i nt erveni ng hi gh erautho ri ty) ; B an uelos-Ayon v. H

older , 61 1 F . 3d 10 80 , 10 86 (9th C i r. 20 10 ) ( concl ud i ng that J ohns on , w h ic h c o n c e rn e d as ta tu te “a k in to C a lif o rn ia 's s im p le b a tte ry s ta tu te ,” di d notunde rm i ne the c our t ’ s pr i orc onc l us i on tha tac onvi c t i on f orw i l l f ul i nf l i c t i on of c orpor a l i nj ury upon as pous e orc ohabi t a ntw a s ac a t e gor i c a l c r i m e of vi ol ence ). AF F I RME D.
Order entered July 3 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 1 4
- 0 1 0 65
- CR
ARTHUR FRANKLIN MILL ER, JR. , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 296 th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296
- 81265
- 2013



### O RDER Before Justices Lang , Stoddart , and Schenck Appellant appealed this case to this Court, urging in a single issue that he received ineffective assistance of coun sel. On June 1, 2015, this Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. On May 23, 2018, the Court of Criminal Appeals remanded this case to this Court determine whether appellant demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that he would have opted for a jury if h is attorney had correctly advised him about his probation eligibility from the trial court. Although the trial judge made oral findings at the conclusion of the September 2, 2014 hearing on appellant’s motion for new tri al , the court did not recite or ent er any findings with respect towhether appellant demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that he would have opted for a jury if his

attorney had correctly advised him about his probation eligibility from the trial court. The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedur e require that we not affirm or reverse a judg ment or dismiss an appeal if (1) the trial court’s erroneous action or failure to act prevents the proper presentation of a case to the court of appeals and (2) the court can correct its action or failure to

ac t. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 44.4(a)

. Accordingly, w e ORDER the trial court to enter supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding whether appellant demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that he would have in fact opted for a jury if his attorne y had correctly advised him about his probation eligibility from the trial court

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 44.4. We ORDER the trial court to transmit a supplemental clerk’s record containing the supplemental findings of fact and conclusions of law to this Cou rt no later than TWENTY DAYS from the date of this order.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order to the Honorable John Roach, Jr., Presiding Judge of the 296th Judicial District Court and to all counsel in this case.
We ABATE this appeal to all ow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal shall be reinstated THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order or when the supplemental clerk’s record is received, whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE
#### Victoria D. BAER d/b/a The Ole Corner, Appellant, v. SUPERVISOR OF LIQUOR CONTROL, Respondent.

No. WD 47513.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Sept. 21, 1993.

Carla G. Holste, Carson & Coil, P.C., Jefferson City, for appellant.

David J. Hansen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before BRECKENRIDGE, P.J., and KENNEDY and LOWENSTEIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

*ORDER*

Appellant appeals the affirmance by the circuit court of the decision of the Administrative Hearing Commission which found cause to discipline appellant’s liquor-by-the-drink license for a violation of 11 C.S.R. 70-2.130(13)(A), and the order of the Supervisor of Liquor Control which revoked appellant’s license for that violation.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3868 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3868

To extend certain programs under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
                      through September 30, 1996.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 23, 1996

 Mr. Schaefer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend certain programs under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 
                      through September 30, 1996.

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

SECTION 1. ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT AMENDMENTS.

    The Energy Policy and Conservation Act is amended--
            (1) by amending section 166 (42 U.S.C. 6246) to read as 
        follows:

                   ``authorization of appropriations

    ``Sec. 166. There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 
1996 such sums as may be necessary to implement this part.'';
            (2) in section 181 (42 U.S.C. 6251) by striking ``June 30, 
        1996'' both places it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
        ``September 30, 1996''; and
            (3) by adding at the end of section 256(h) (42 U.S.C. 
        6276(h)) ``There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal 
        year 1996 such sums as may be necessary to carry out this 
        part.''; and
            (4) in section 281 (42 U.S.C. 6285) by striking ``June 30, 
        1996'' both places it appears and inserting in lieu thereof 
        ``September 30, 1996''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
13



UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

MICAH FIALKA-FELDMAN,
Case Number 08-CV-14922
Plaintiff, Hon. Patrick J. Duggan

Vv.

OAKLAND UNIVERSITY BOARD

OF TRUSTEES, GARY D. RUSSL MARY BETH
SNYDER, and LIONEL MATEN, in their

official capacities,

Defendants.

AFFIDAVIT OF LINDA SISSON

STATE OF MICHIGAN )
)ss
COUNTY OF OAKLAND )

I, Linda Sisson, state under oath that the following is true:

1. I have personal knowledge of the facts in this Affidavit and, if sworn as a witness
in this matter, I can competently testify to the facts stated herein.

2. I am currently employed by Oakland University as its Director of Disability
Support Services.

3. Disability Support Services maintains a database of self-identified disabled
students attending Oakland University.

4. According to the most recent information in that database, there are 383 disabled
students enrolled in degree-granting programs at Oakland University.



5. According to Oakland University’s records, 76 disabled students in degree-
granting programs live in on-campus housing at the University.

Further affiant sayeth not.
fo 4
vor,
Dida Om
LindaSisson, Director
Disability Support Services
STATE OF MICHIGAN )
)ss
COUNTY OF OAKLAND )

fh.

The signator is known to me and acknowledged the foregoing instrument this /: iB day of
November, 2009.

tiny
Jefnifer iaybwy, Notary Public
akland Coutety, Michigan
My Commission expires: 10/11/15
Jonnifer L. Swiatowy
Notary Publlc

Oakland County, Michigan
My Commission Expires: 10-11-15

i)
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER ON M OTION FOR R EHEARING

Appellate case name: Joseph John Flores II V. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 10

- 00531

- CR , 01

- 10

- 00532

- CR, 01

- 10

- 00533

- CR. 01

- 10

- 005 34

-

CR

Trial court case number: 1114129

Trial court: 228th District Court of Harris County

Date motion filed: March 22, 2013

Party filing motion: Appellant

It is ordered that the motion for rehearing is DENIED GRANTED

.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Terry Jennings

Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of: Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Keyes

Date: May 1, 2013
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division 

                    Notice is hereby given that, on July 9, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), Petroleum Environmental Research Forum (“PERF”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, The Questor Centre, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UNITED KINGDOM has been added as a party to this venture.                 

No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and PERF intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. 

                    On February 10, 1986, PERF filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on March 14, 1986 (51 FR 8903).                           ( print page 44774)    

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on November 15, 2007. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7762).                 

Patricia A. Brink, 

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. 

[FR Doc. E8–17512 Filed 7–30–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–11–M
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Lucky Strike Explorations Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael
Noble, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
6th day of August, 2007.


/s/ Michael Noble
---------------------------
Chief Financial Officer