alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Commonwealth *v.*Wheeler, Appellant.

*Criminal law*— Murder—Insanity — *Presumption of sanity*— *Charge of court.*

1. Sanity is the normal condition of mind; its existence is to be presumed and the burden of proving insanity, rests upon the party relying upon it as a defense.

2. Where, in a murder trial, the fact that defendant killed deceased without justification or excuse was established beyond doubt, but the defense was insanity, the only question to be determined by the jury was whether the defendant’s insanity had been established by satisfactory proof, and it was not the duty of the trial judge to charge the jury that the defendant was entitled to the presumption of innocence.

Argued Sept. 28, 1914.

Appeal, No. 246, Jan. T., 1914, by defendant, from judgment of O. & T., Bradford Co., Feb. T., 1914, No. 1, on verdict of guilty of murder of the first degree in case of Commonwealth v. Samuel Wheeler.

Before Fell, C. J., Brown, Mestrezat, Potter, Elkin and Stewart, JJ.

Affirmed.

Indictment for murder. Before Maxwell, P. J.

The facts appear in the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Verdict of guilty of murder of the first degree, upon which sentence of death was passed. Defendant appealed.

*Error assigned*was the charge of the jury.

*Charles E. Mills,*of *Mills*& *Schrier,*with him, *W. T. Carey,*for appellant.

*Charles M. Culver,*District Attorney, for appellee.

October 26, 1914:

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Fell,

The appellant was convicted of murder of the first *529degree. That he killed the deceased without the slightest justification or excuse was established beyond the possibility of doubt and was conceded at the trial. The only defense was that of insanity. The error alleged in the single assignment filed is that the trial judge failed to instruct the jury that the appellant was entitled to the presumption of innocence. A request to so charge was not made and there was no reason for so charging. On the issue raised the only verdict that could have been rendered was guilty of murder of the first degree or not guilty on the ground of insanity. The testimony and the admissions at the trial effectually rebutted the presumption of innocence to which a person accused of crime is entitled and the only question to be determined was whether the defense of insanity had been established by satisfactory proof. On this subject there was no presumption in the appellant’s favor. The presumption was against him. Sanity is the normal condition of mind and its existence is to be presumed and the burden of proof was on him: Com. v. Molten, 230 Pa. 399. The judgment is affirmed and it is directed that the record be remitted for the purpose of execution.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

v. Case No. 06-cr-122-01/02/03-SM

Chamroeun Van,

Soreasey Soeur and

Srey Eng

O R D E R

Government’s motion to continue the final pretrial conference and trial is

granted (document 132). Trial has been rescheduled for the November 2006

trial period. Defendants shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later than

September 5, 2006. On the filing of such waivers, this continuance shall be

effective. 

The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant s in a speedy trial, 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny defendants the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Final Pretrial Conference: October 30, 2006 at 3:30 p.m.

Jury Selection: November 7, 2006 at 9:30 a.m.

Case 1:06-cr-00122-SM Document 135 Filed 08/29/06 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

August 29, 2006

cc: John Kacavas, Esq.

Steven Rappaport, Esq.

David Bownes, Esq.

Mark Zuckerman, AUSA

US Probation

US Marshal

Case 1:06-cr-00122-SM Document 135 Filed 08/29/06 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit32.01**

 

**OfficerCertification**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Public Service Company ofColorado (PSCo) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2007, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (Form 10-Q),each of the undersigned officers of PSCo certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, to such officer’s knowledge:

 

(1)          The Form 10-Q fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

 

(2)          The information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of PSCo as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Form10-Q.

 

Date: Oct. 29,2007

 
| /s/ TIM E. TAYLOR                           |   |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|
| Tim E.  Taylor                              |   |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer      |   |
|                                        |   |
| /s/ BENJAMIN  G.S. FOWKE III                |   |
| Benjamin  G.S. Fowke III                    |   |
| Vice  President and Chief Financial Officer |   |

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 andis not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed formwithin the electronic version of this written statement required by Section906, has been provided to PSCo and will be retained by PSCo and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----
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 Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [Docket 24-2008]

A request has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) by Hawker Beechcraft Corporation (HBC) to amend the company’s application requesting special-purpose subzone status for the company’s aircraft manufacturing facilities located in Wichita and Salina, Kansas.

                    HBC is now requesting to include additional finished products in the company’s requested scope of authority. The additional finished products will be manufactured using the same imported parts and components (duty-free to 15 percent) as described in the original                     **Federal Register**                     notice (73 FR 21903-21904, 4/23/08). The additional finished products (duty-free) are as follows: propellers, rotors and parts thereof (8803.10); undercarriages and parts thereof (8803.20); and, other parts of airplanes (8803.30).                

Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at the address listed below. The closing period for their receipt is October 20, 2008. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period (to November 3, 2008).

A copy of the application amendment and accompanying exhibits will be available at each of the following addresses: U. S. Department of Commerce Export Assistance Center, 150 North Main Street, Suite 200, Wichita, Kansas; and, Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C., 20230. For further information contact Christopher Kemp at christopher_kemp@ita.doc.gov or (202) 482-0862.

Dated: September 4, 2008.

Andrew McGilvray,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. E8-21850 Filed 9-17-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
Exhibit 99.2

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
Quarterly Report of Puget Energy, Inc. and Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (the Companies) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Form 10-Q), I, Stephen A. McKeon, Senior Vice President Finance and Legal, Chief Financial Officer
of the Companies, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| | (1) | The Form 10Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2) | The information contained in the Form 10Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Companies.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|August 12, 2002
|---------------
|               
|               
|
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Commissioner of the

NH Insurance Department,

Plaintiff

v. Civil No. 05-cv-278-SM

Employers Insurance Company

of Wausau,

Defendant

O R D E R

Denied [11] Motion to Dismiss. Although defendant makes a

number of solid arguments, having reviewed the pleadings in

detail, the court is of the view that the record is

insufficiently developed with respect to a number of potentially

critical matters, particularly those relating to the intention of

the parties (Home and USI Re) with respect to the Quota Share

Agreement, the relationship between Home, USI Re, and Wausau,

construction of the mutuality requirement described in the

statute, and the nature and scope of the prior arbitration

proceeding, to name a few. In short, the record does not support

dismissal. Perhaps a better developed record may support

disposition on summary judgment, but defendant has not shown that

the Commissioner cannot prevail on any set of provable facts. 

Parenthetically, the court also notes that, as implied by the

Case 1:05-cv-00278-SM Document 26 Filed 08/03/06 Page 1 of 2
2

court of appeals earlier, some of the state law issues arising

here seemingly lend themselves to certification, and that issue

ought to be discussed with counsel before proceeding much

further. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

August 3, 2006

cc: Peter C. L. Roth, Esq.

Andrew R. Levin, Esq.

Doreen F. Connor, Esq.

Natasha C. Lisman, Esq.

Case 1:05-cv-00278-SM Document 26 Filed 08/03/06 Page 2 of 2
TABLE 11
Electric Power Use
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
				  Series
    Series title		  Code	         NAICS		
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total industry                    B00001
Manufacturing (SIC)               B00004
Durable manufacturing (NAICS)     GMFD
Nondurable manufacturing (NAICS)  GMFN
Mining                            G21            21
Total Less Nuclear Non-defense    B00002
Utility Sales to Industry         B0000S
Industrial Generation             B0000G
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 1 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 2 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 3 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 4 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 5 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 6 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 7 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 8 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 9 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 10 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 11 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 12 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 13 of 14
Case 1:04-cv-00298-PB Document 1 Filed 08/10/04 Page 14 of 14
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 22, 2016 

# Order

June 22 , 2016

1530 8 2 ( 2 8 )

DEANNA D. MABRY

, Plaintiff

- Appell ant

,

v

JOHANNA SUZANNE

- GRAINE MABRY

, Defendant

- Appell ee

. SC: 15308 2

COA: 32 9786

Washtenaw CC: 201 5

- 001873

- D C

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the joint motion of t he Children’s Trauma

Assessment Center, t he Michigan Chapter of the National Association o f Social Workers,

and the Michigan League f or Public Policy to participate as amicus curiae and file a brief

in support of the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. The amicus brief

submitted on June 17 , 2016 , is accepted for filing

.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.11

                           Technical Service Agreement*

Party A: Harbin Three-Happiness Bioengineering Co., Ltd.

Party B: Ecological Research Institute of Chinese Academy of Sciences

After careful discussion, Party B agrees to provide party A technical support
for Cease enuresis soft capsule prouduction. Both parties agree the following
items.

     Item 1. Party B agrees to provide technical support to Party A.

     Item 2. Party B guarantees that it will not disclose the technique know-how
to the third Party, otherwise it must compensate Party A economic loss.

     Item 3. Party B is responsible to direct and solve technical problem when
Party A meets such problems during producing Cease enuresis Soft gel.

     Item 4. Party A warrants that will provide party B good working conditions
during cooperation.

     Item 5. compensation Party A agrees to pay Party B RMB10,000 Yuan for
providing technique service.

     Item 6. How to pay

     Party A will pay party B RMB50,000 yuan upon execution this agreement.
Only the technical support provided by Party B has been recognized by Party A,
and was proved effective, then the rest RMB50,000 yuan could be paid by Party
A.

     Item 7. Counterparts

     The agreement is duplicated and each copy has the same legal validity upon
being signed by both Parties.

     Item 8. Both parties agree to solve issues occurring which are not
expressed clearly hereby by friendly discussion together.

Party A; Harbin Three-Happiness Bioengineering Co., Ltd.
      Signed by: Shujun Liu

Party B; Ecological Research Institute of Chinese Academy of Sciences
      Signed by: Xing Fu
      Date: June 21, 2000


*Translation from Chinese original
Exhibit (10)(a)

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

  

  

  

  

  We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment
      No. 10 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-193277) and Amendment No. 511 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-09763), and to the use therein of
      our reports dated (a) April 1, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln Life & Annuity Company of New York and
      (b) April 16, 2019, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln New York Account N For Variable Annuities for the registration of interests
      in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.

  

  

               /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

  

  

  

  

  

  

  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

  August 22, 2019
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Carl I. Hill, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On this appeal from a judgment of conviction, following a jury trial, of rape, sodomy and sexual abuse, defendant contends that there was insufficient evidence of "forcible compulsion” (Penal Law § 130.00 [8]). In a prosecution for sex offenses based upon forcible compulsion, the *853proper focus is on the state of mind produced in the victim by the defendant’s conduct *(People v Thompson,*72 NY2d 410, 415-416). Moreover, whether the sexual intercourse was voluntary or the result of forcible compulsion is a question of fact for the jury to determine *(see, People v Yannucci,*283 NY 546, 549; *People v Vicaretti,*54 AD2d 236, 241-242). Here, the victim testified in detail as to the express and implied threats of defendant and the codefendant and her fear for her personal safety if she refused to submit. Given that testimony, which the jury found credible, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to establish forcible compulsion.

The court did not err in admitting the victim’s bloodstained pants into evidence. Because the item in issue is clothing, identification of the item by the victim as her clothing was sufficient for its admission into evidence *(see, People v Samuels,*121 AD2d 751; *People v Flores,*101 AD2d 657). The pants, a nonfungible piece of evidence, were identified by the victim as the pants she was wearing on the night of the incident. Additionally, the clothing was probative on the issue of whether any force was used.

Defendant contends that the verdict sheet submitted to the jury improperly amended the indictment. There was no objection to the verdict sheet; thus that issue was not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; *People v Barber,*154 AD2d 882, *lv denied*75 NY2d 810, 917; *People v Ryan,*152 AD2d 960, *lv denied*74 NY2d 899). Were we to review that issue in the interest of justice, we would find no merit to defendant’s claim.

Finally, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Doyle, J.—rape, first degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Balio and Lowery, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997             JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                           8,126                  10,629
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,405                  22,625
<ALLOWANCES>                                     3,309                   7,500
<INVENTORY>                                      8,133                   5,182
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                48,717                  38,531
<PP&E>                                         395,842                 243,723
<DEPRECIATION>                                 197,173                 113,282
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 267,901                 176,746
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           41,346                  27,214
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           181                     181
<OTHER-SE>                                      98,468                  92,837
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   267,901                 176,746
<SALES>                                         11,940                   9,146
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                68,844                  49,260
<CGS>                                            6,642                   5,206
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,438                  23,335
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   109                     178
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,249                   3,671
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,389                   3,023
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,005                     596
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,384                   2,427
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,384                   2,427
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .33                     .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1092 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1092

     To ensure that amounts in the Victims of Crime Fund are fully 
                               obligated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 19, 2001

   Mr. Simmons (for himself, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Green of Wisconsin, Mr. 
  Royce, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, Mr. Shays, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Mr. 
Smith of New Jersey, Mr. Flake, Mr. Udall of New Mexico, Ms. Hooley of 
Oregon, Mr. Abercrombie, and Mr. Hall of Ohio) introduced the following 
       bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To ensure that amounts in the Victims of Crime Fund are fully 
                               obligated.

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

SECTION 1. FULL OBLIGATION OF AMOUNTS IN THE VICTIMS OF CRIME FUND.

    Section 1402 of the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 10601) 
is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(h)(1) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Act 
(including the emergency reserve referred to in subsection (d)(5)), the 
Director shall ensure that all sums in the Fund in a fiscal year are in 
fact obligated in the subsequent fiscal year.
    ``(2) A provision of law may not be construed as modifying or 
superseding the provisions of paragraph (1) unless that provision of 
law--
            ``(A) specifically refers to this section; and
            ``(B) specifically states that such provision of law 
        modifies or supersedes the provisions of this section.''.
                                 <all>
```