alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 18-14955

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 5:17-cr-00005-LGW-BWC-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CEDRIC L. KING,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Georgia

________________________

(September 5, 2019)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Cedric King appeals the substantive reasonableness of his 268-month 

sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute controlled substances. 

Case: 18-14955 Date Filed: 09/05/2019 Page: 1 of 3 
2

The government argues this appeal should be dismissed based on the appeal waiver 

in King’s written plea agreement.

“We review the validity of a sentence appeal waiver de novo.” United 

States v. Johnson, 541 F.3d 1064, 1066 (11th Cir. 2008). “A sentence appeal 

waiver must be made knowingly and voluntarily.” Id. “The waiver is valid if the 

government shows either that: (1) the district court specifically questioned the 

defendant about the waiver; or (2) the record makes clear that the defendant 

otherwise understood the full significance of the waiver.” Id.

King’s plea agreement included the following appeal waiver:

Defendant waives his right to appeal on any ground, with 

only three exceptions: he may appeal his sentence if (1) 

that sentence exceeds the statutory maximum, (2) that 

sentence exceeds the advisory Guidelines range 

determined by this Court at sentencing, or (3) the 

government appeals. By signing the plea agreement, 

Defendant explicitly instructs his attorney not to file an 

appeal unless one of the three exceptions is met.

When King entered his plea, the district court described the terms of the appeal 

waiver and asked King if he had any questions about it. King said he did not. 

After the plea colloquy, the district court found King’s plea was knowingly and 

voluntarily entered.

The district court correctly concluded King knowingly and voluntarily 

agreed to the sentence appeal waiver. See United States v. Buchanan, 131 F.3d 

1005, 1008 (11th Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (explaining a sentence waiver was 

Case: 18-14955 Date Filed: 09/05/2019 Page: 2 of 3 
3

knowingly and voluntarily entered where the plea “colloquy establishe[d] that the 

defendant understood the nature and extent of the appeal waiver and agreed to it”). 

Also, none of the three exceptions to King’s appeal waiver are present. We will 

therefore enforce King’s appeal waiver and dismiss this appeal.

DISMISSED.

Case: 18-14955 Date Filed: 09/05/2019 Page: 3 of 3
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 GCI, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald A. Duncan, Chief Executive 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. |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| November 5, 2007 |   | /s/ Ronald A. Duncan    |
|------------------|--------|-------------------------|
| Date             |   | Ronald A. Duncan        |
|             |   | Chief Executive Officer |
|             |   | GCI, Inc.               |

 

 

 

1
Exhibit 15.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our reports dated May 12, 2016 with respect to the consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting included
in the Annual Report of WNS (Holdings) Limited on Form 20-F for the year ended March 31, 2016.

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of
said reports in the Registration Statements of WNS (Holdings) Limited on Form S-8 (File No. 333-136168, File No. 333-157356, File No. 333-176849 and File No. 333-191416).



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ GRANT THORNTON INDIA LLP
|                            
|Mumbai, India               
|May 12, 2016
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Otter Tail Corporation (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
John D. Erickson, President and 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 results of
operations of the Company.

| |  |                                       
| |  | --------------------------------------
| |  | /s/ John D. Erickson

John D. Erickson
| |  | President and Chief Executive Officer 
| |  | November 14, 2003
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  1.
    
    The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
  /s/  David C. MannonDavid C. MannonPresident and Chief Executive Officer
LLS 10K - Certification (Inv 294) **EXHIBIT 31****CERTIFICATION****GSAMP Trust 2006-HE2**I, Elizabeth Folk, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Litton Loan Servicing LP, certify that: 1. I have reviewed the report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of  the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of  GSAMP Trust 2006-HE2  (the "Exchange Act Periodic Reports"); 2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act Periodic Reports, taken as a whole, do 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 report; 3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicin g and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act Periodic Reports; 4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act Periodic Reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the pooling and servicing agreement in all material respects; and 5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K. In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:  The Bank of New York (custodian) and  U.S. Bank National Association (trustee). Date:  March 30, 2007 /s/ Elizabeth Folk____________ Elizabeth Folk Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the servicer)
EXHIBIT 31.1
                       CERTIFICATION

I, Stephen L. Baum, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Pacific
Enterprises;

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 officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and we have:

a)	Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under
our supervision, 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 and presented in this Quarterly Report
our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this Quarterly Report, based on such evaluation; and

c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting;

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent function):

a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal controls over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; 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 over financial reporting.


November 6, 2003

/S/ STEPHEN L. BAUM
Stephen L. Baum
Chief Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Juan NICHOLAS, a/k/a Scan, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-4279.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted July 24, 2003.

Decided Aug. 1, 2003.

Andrew J. Katz, the Katz Working Families Law Firm, L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Kasey Warner, United States Attorney, Miller A. Bushong, III, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Juan Nicholas pled guilty to distribution of cocaine base (crack), 21 U.S.C. § 841 (2000), and was sentenced as a career offender to a term of 188 months imprisonment. Nicholas appeals his sentence, contending that the district court clearly erred in determining that he was responsible for 53.05 grams of crack for sentencing purposes. *U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual*§ 2D1.1 (2002). We affirm.

Nicholas was arrested after he ran a red light while driving on a suspended license. When Trevia Province, the passenger in the front seat got out, a three-gram piece of crack was left on the seat behind her in plain view. At the police station, Province voluntarily turned over to the police 15.4 grams of crack packaged for sale. She told the police Nicholas had handed this crack to her and asked her to hide it when he saw the blue light behind his vehicle. *219Nicholas’ relevant conduct included this amount as well as 34.9 grams of crack recovered from his vehicle and 2.75 grams of crack Nicholas sold to a confidential informant eight months earlier, making a total of 53.05 grams of crack. Nicholas contested the 15.4 grams attributed to him on the strength of Province’s statement, denying that he gave it to her or knew she possessed it. Province testified at Nicholas’ sentencing hearing. Nicholas did not testify. The passenger in the back seat of the car, Deanna Crawford, had told the police that she did not see Nicholas hand anything to Province. Crawford was unavailable to testify.* The district court found Province’s testimony credible.

The government bears the burden of proving the quantity of drugs attributable to the defendant, *United States v. Lipford,*203 F.3d 259, 272 (4th Cir.2000), and may do so by means of evidence presented at sentencing. *United States v. Gilliam,*987 F.2d 1009, 1013 (4th Cir.1993). Although Nicholas asserts on appeal that Province’s testimony was not credible in light of Crawford’s statement, the district court found that Province was credible. Issues of witness credibility are reserved for the factfinder and are not reviewed by the appeals court. *United States v. Wilson,*118 F.3d 228, 234 (4th Cir.1997).

We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*

*

 Crawford had been questioned by police and released. She was later murdered; her death was still under investigation.
Exhibit 32
                    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 Commercial Property Corporation
(the "Registrant") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending July 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Quarterly Report"), we, David C. Merrell, President and Kristine M. Rogers,
Secretary/Treasurer of the Registrant, 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 Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Registrant.


Dated: 9/14/2005                          /s/David C. Merrell
      ----------                          -------------------------
                                          David C. Merrell
                                          President and Director


Dated: 9/14/2005                          /s/Kristine M. Rogers
      ----------                          -------------------------
                                          Kristine M. Rogers
                                          Secretary and Treasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT 
<LEGEND>  THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION  
EXTRACTED FROM THE STATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED INCOME, BALANCE SHEET,  
AND CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO  
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. 
<CIK> 0000075527 
<NAME> PACIFIC ENTERPRISES 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000 
        
<S>                             <C> 
 
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR 
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998 
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998 
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK 
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                        2,973 
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                         54 
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             650 
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                           390 
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                     369 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   4,436 
<COMMON>                                         1,045 
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0 
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                362 
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                   1,407 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0 
<PREFERRED>                                         80 
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                             1,190 
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                  32 
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0 
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0 
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        0 
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0 
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0 
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0 
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                   1,727 
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                    4,436 
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        1,781 
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                87 
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       1,543 
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                       1,630 
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            151 
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                   3 
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     154 
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            57 
<NET-INCOME>                                        97 
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          3 
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                       94 
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                            97 
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0 
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             566 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0 
 
         
 



</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

TIMOTHY J. HOFFMAN AND KAREN D. HOFFMAN, HIS WIFE,

Petitioners

v.

JAMES P. SNELL, ANADARKO E & P COMPANY, LP, AND CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA, LLC,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 263 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 15th day of September, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED

.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

NO. 97-KA-00433-SCT

JERRY MYERS

v.

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 2/18/97

TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MARCUS D. GORDON

COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: SCOTT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: EDMUND J. PHILLIPS, JR.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: W. GLENN WATTS

DISTRICT ATTORNEY: KEN TURNER

NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL - FELONY

DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 3/18/99

MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:

MANDATE ISSUED: 4/14/99

BEFORE PRATHER, C.J., SMITH AND MILLS, JJ.

MILLS, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

¶1. Jerry Myers was convicted in the Circuit Court of Scott County, Mississippi, for the sale of crack

cocaine within one thousand (1,000) feet of a public park. The trial judge sentenced Myers to serve fifteen

(15) years in the Mississippi Department of Corrections and pay a $5,000 fine. Myers appeals to this Court

asserting that the jury verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence presented at trial. At

trial, three witnesses, including undercover agent Shelley Arnold, confidential informant Stacy Porter, and

narcotics agent Jimmie Nichols, identified Myers as the man who sold the cocaine to Shelley Arnold.

¶2. We have repeatedly held that matters of weight and credibility of the evidence are to be left up to the

jury. Cooper v. State, 639 So. 2d 1320, 1324 (Miss. 1994). Only in cases "when the verdict is so

contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an

unconscionable injustice" will a reviewing court disturb it on appeal. Herring v. State, 691 So. 2d 948,

957 (Miss. 1997). We find sufficient proof in the record to support the jury verdict. Therefore, we find the

Appellant's argument is without merit and affirm the decision of the trial court.

¶3. CONVICTION OF SALE OF COCAINE WITHIN 1,000 FEET OF PUBLIC PARK AND

SENTENCE OF FIFTEEN (15) YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND PAYMENT OF A $5,000.00 FINE AFFIRMED.

APPELLANT IS GIVEN CREDIT FOR JAIL TIME SERVED.

PRATHER, C.J., SULLIVAN AND PITTMAN, P.JJ., BANKS, McRAE, SMITH AND

WALLER, JJ., CONCUR.