alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Alton Hilts, Appellant.

[807 NYS2d 493]

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady *1020County (Eidens, J.), rendered July 14, 2003, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

In May 2003, defendant waived indictment and agreed to be prosecuted by a superior court information charging him with criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, both class D felonies. He subsequently pleaded guilty to the charges and waived his right to appeal. In exchange, defendant was to be sentenced as a second felony offender to prison terms of 2 to 4 years on the drug charge and 3 to 6 years on the weapons charge, to run consecutively, and was also ordered to pay restitution of $240 and a forfeiture of $270. The basis for sentencing defendant as a second felony offender was his conviction on September 4, 1991 of attempted criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, which he admitted. Defendant was sentenced in accordance with the terms of the plea bargain and now appeals.

Defendant challenges the legality of the sentence, arguing that his 1991 conviction did not provide a valid basis for his classification as a second felony offender because it occurred more than 10 years prior to the crimes at issue and there are no applicable tolling periods *(see*Penal Law § 70.06 [1] [b] [iv], [v]; *People v Stanley,*12 AD3d 467 [2004], *lv denied*4 NY3d 891 [2005]). Initially, we note that inasmuch as defendant’s adjudication as a second felony offender resulted in a greater sentence than would have otherwise been imposed and, consequently, implicated his right to be sentenced according to law, it is not subject to the preservation requirement *(see People v Samms,*95 NY2d 52 [2000]; *People v Stanley, supra*at 467). Turning to the merits, it is clear from the predicate felony statement that the prior crime occurred outside the 10-year window and the People concede that there are no applicable tolling periods. In view of this, the sentence must be vacated and the matter remitted to County Court for resentencing *(see People v Wilsey,*301 AD2d 755, 756 [2003]). Given our disposition, we need not address defendant’s remaining claim.

Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the sentence imposed; matter remitted to the County Court of Schenectady County for resentencing; and, as so modified, affirmed.
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 August 28, 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”)/IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. 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, CREDU Co., Ltd., Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; DaulSoft Co., Ltd., Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; Laureate Online Education, Baltimore, MD; Miami-Dade College—Virtual College, Miami, FL; and Utah Valley University, Orem, UT have been added as parties to this venture. Also, Intrallect, Scotland, UNITED KINGDOM has withdrawn 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 IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.

                    On April 7, 2000, IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. 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 September 13, 2000 (65 FR 55283).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 10, 2008. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 21, 2008 (73 FR 42367).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. E8-22662 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

May 8, 2024

No. 04

- 2 3

- 00 982

- CV

IN RE RYDER INTEGRATED LOGISTICS, INC. and Arthur McDaniels Moore, Relators

Original Proceeding 1

ORDER

Relators filed a petition for writ of mandamus on November 11, 2023. On April 29, 2024, relators filed an agreed motion to dismiss the mandamus petition

, informing this court that a settlement had been reached between the parties in the underlying matter.

After consideration, the court GRANTS the motion. Accordingly, relators ’ petition for writ

of mandamus is DISMISSED

.

It is so ORDERED on May 8, 2024.

_____________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez

, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 8th day of May, 2024.

_____________________________ Luz Estrada , Chief Deputy Clerk

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2023

- CI

- 03928, in the 166th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable John Gabriel presiding.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         264,953
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                7,028,598
<ALLOWANCES>                                 3,858,113
<INVENTORY>                                  4,773,130
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,351,967
<PP&E>                                       2,087,230
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,290,880
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,477,970
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,939,262
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        225
<COMMON>                                        24,540
<OTHER-SE>                                   (486,057)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,477,970
<SALES>                                      9,709,999
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,709,999
<CGS>                                        8,174,862
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,240,599
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                75,572
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             495,303
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,276,337)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,276,337)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,276,337)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.97)
        

</TABLE>
#### C. E. DENNARD and wife, Estelle Dennard, Appellants, v. Charles B. KNOWLES and wife, Onie B. Knowles, Appellees.

Supreme Court of Florida. Division A.

Jan. 21, 1955.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
18

A.13. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, FPercent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rateVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 394,700 75,106 118,310 106,446 23,354 2,002 33,18Number of loans 12,521 2,200 2,886 3,881 1,017 122 88Weighted average maturity (months)1 18.60 21.74 17.74 18.49 11.25 100.14 20.3

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 10.80 9.33 10.26 12.54 4.48 78.49 11.4

Weighted average risk rating3 2.26 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.a

Weighted average interest rate4 8.27 7.72 8.35 8.36 8.80 8.59 8.2

 Standard error5 .11 .21 .18 .21 .10 .73 .2

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 8.82 8.34 8.82 8.84 9.35 9.20 8.9 25th percentile 7.64 6.75 7.64 7.90 8.57 7.90 7.5 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.16 7.92 8.11 8.15 8.98 9.50 8.2 Other livestock 8.56 8.99 n.a. 8.85 9.33 8.75 8.8 Other current operating expenses7 8.28 7.47 8.41 8.35 8.88 9.75 8.1

 Farm machinery and equipment 8.48 8.49 8.43 8.36 8.22 n.a. 8.5 Farm real estate 7.38 7.11 7.44 7.38 n.a. n.a. 8.5 Other8 8.35 8.25 9.60 8.25 7.76 7.90 8.0

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 39.55 30.58 48.48 35.65 59.75 45.55 35.5 Under commitment 44.56 37.54 39.52 53.27 41.41 31.23 72.8 Callable 18.65 18.63 7.61 24.29 12.17 13.41 21.0 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.55 16.66 3.35 2.73 14.48 3.77 15.4 Other livestock 9.68 4.86 14.07 6.87 3.01 14.32 14.1 Other current operating expenses7 66.28 55.29 68.13 77.20 70.13 27.47 57.8

 Farm machinery and equipment 4.75 2.51 3.84 7.67 6.37 n.a. 2.9 Farm real estate 4.65 7.49 8.22 1.42 n.a. n.a. 1.1 Other8 6.10 13.19 2.39 4.11 6.00 54.45 8.3

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 13.29 19.25 13.19 12.46 19.76 64.10 1.1 Other 84.71 80.56 84.04 86.40 79.54 35.90 95.7 Note. Most small and mid-sized farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had less than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22
- 6483

WILLIAM ALVA HEMMING , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. C.O. B. HAWERD; C.O. J. KISH; C.O. C. BENETTE; HAZELTON FCI; DR. MYERS, Psychology , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Wheeling

. John Preston Bailey , District Judge. ( 5:21

- cv - 00071

- JPB

- JPM )

Submitted : July 31, 2023 Decided: November 9, 2023

Before WYNN and RUSHING , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. William Alva Hemming, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6483 Doc: 9 Filed: 11/09/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: William A l va Hemming appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of
Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Hemming v. Hawerd , No. 5:21

- cv - 00071

- JPB

- JPM (N.D.W. Va. Mar. 10, 2022). 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 t he decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 22-6483 Doc: 9 Filed: 11/09/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
36

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1estate loans estate loans

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2004: Q1... 6.3 6.2 n.a. 5.9

 Q2... 6.5 6.4 n.a. 6.2

 Q3... 6.6 6.6 n.a. 6.3

 Q4... 6.8 6.8 n.a. 6.4

2005: Q1... 7.1 7.1 n.a. 6.6

 Q2... 7.3 7.3 n.a. 6.7

 Q3... 7.6 7.7 n.a. 7.0

 Q4... 8.0 8.0 n.a. 7.3

2006: Q1... 8.3 8.3 n.a. 7.5

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2004: Q1... 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.0

 Q2... 7.2 7.2 7.3 7.1

 Q3... 7.4 7.4 7.5 6.9

 Q4... 7.6 7.6 7.7 7.0

2005: Q1... 7.8 8.0 7.9 7.4

 Q2... 8.1 8.3 8.2 7.6

 Q3... 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0

 Q4... 8.9 8.9 8.7 8.1

2006: Q1... 9.0 9.2 8.8 8.2

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*) 

2004: Q1... 6.6 6.4 6.7 6.3

 Q2... 6.9 6.4 6.5 6.5

 Q3... 7.2 7.0 7.0 6.7

 Q4... 7.4 7.0 7.1 6.9

2005: Q1... 7.6 7.4 7.4 7.2

 Q2... 7.7 7.5 7.5 7.7

 Q3... 8.1 8.0 8.0 7.9

 Q4... 8.6 8.4 8.4 8.0

2006: Q1... 8.9 9.1 8.7 8.4
37

C.4. Average Fixed Interest Rates on Farm Loans (continued)

Percent

Feeder cattle Other operating Intermediate non-real Long-term real

Quarter loans loans1-estate loans estate loans

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2004: Q1... n.a. 7.0 7.1 6.7

 Q2... n.a. 7.1 7.1 6.8

 Q3... n.a. 7.3 7.4 7.0

 Q4... n.a. 7.6 7.6 7.2

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.7 7.7 7.3

 Q2... n.a. 7.9 7.9 7.4

 Q3... n.a. 8.2 8.1 7.6

 Q4... n.a. 8.5 8.4 7.9

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.8 8.7 8.1

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2004: Q1... n.a. 6.6 6.7 6.4

 Q2... n.a. 6.7 6.8 6.5

 Q3... n.a. 6.9 7.0 6.7

 Q4... n.a. 7.2 7.3 6.9

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.4 7.4 7.1

 Q2... n.a. 7.7 7.7 7.3

 Q3... n.a. 7.9 7.9 7.4

 Q4... n.a. 8.3 8.3 7.8

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.4 8.5 7.9

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA) 

2004: Q1... n.a. 6.3 7.0 7.1

 Q2... n.a. 6.8 7.2 7.1

 Q3... n.a. 6.7 7.2 7.4

 Q4... n.a. 7.4 7.8 7.7

2005: Q1... n.a. 7.7 7.9 7.8

 Q2... n.a. 7.5 7.9 7.9

 Q3... n.a. 8.3 8.2 8.1

 Q4... n.a. 9.0 8.8 8.3

2006: Q1... n.a. 8.9 8.7 8.2

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of

livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




September 2011


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: December 15, 2011
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II

Calendar No. 131

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2043

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 6, 2001

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

AUGUST 2, 2001

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 2719 South Webster Street in Kokomo, Indiana, as the ‘‘Elwood Haynes ‘Bud’ Hillis Post Office

Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

4 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo5 cated at 2719 South Webster Street in Kokomo, Indiana,

6 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Elwood Haynes

7 ‘Bud’ Hillis Post Office Building’’.
2

•HR 2043 RS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

4 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

5 to the ‘‘Elwood Haynes ‘Bud’ Hillis Post Office Building’’.

Calendar No. 131

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2043

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2719 South Webster Street

in Kokomo, Indiana, as the ‘‘Elwood Haynes‘Bud’ Hillis Post Office Building’’.

AUGUST 2, 2001

Reported without amendment
| (1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated: November 13, 2009 | /s/ Paul Van Ostenbridge              |
|--------------------------|---------------------------------------|
|                     | Paul Van Ostenbridge                  |
|                     | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                     |                                  |
|                     |                                  |
| Dated: November 13, 2009 | /s/ Claire M. Chadwick                |
|                     | Claire M. Chadwick                    |
|                     | Senior Vice President and             |
|                     | Chief Financial Officer               |
**Exhibit 32.1**
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**
     I, Eugene P. Heytow, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of First Oak Brook Bancshares, Inc. (the“Registrant”), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, based on my knowledge:
 (1)  the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certificationis attached as an exhibit (the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and  (2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialsrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.   Dated: March 10, 2005 /S/ EUGENE P.HEYTOW                    Eugene P. HeytowChairman and Chief Executive Officer
*Release Date: September 30, 2009*

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

----

```
C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans
Percent
```

| Quarter | Other operating loans1 | Intermediate non-real-estate loans | Long-term real estate loans |
|---------|------------------------|------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
||
| 8.8     | 8.7                    | 8.2                                |
| 8.7     | 8.6                    | 8.2                                |
| 8.2     | 8.1                    | 7.6                                |
| 6.9     | 7.0                    | 6.6                                |
| 6.6     | 6.7                    | 6.4                                |
| 6.7     | 6.8                    | 6.5                                |
| 6.2     | 6.4                    | 6.1                                |
| 6.0     | 6.1                    | 5.9                                |
| 6.0     | 6.2                    | 5.9                                |
||
| 9.1     | 8.8                    | 8.2                                |
| 9.0     | 8.7                    | 8.1                                |
| 8.5     | 8.2                    | 7.7                                |
| 7.4     | 7.2                    | 6.7                                |
| 7.1     | 6.9                    | 6.6                                |
| 7.0     | 6.9                    | 6.5                                |
| 6.7     | 6.7                    | 6.4                                |
| 6.5     | 6.5                    | 6.2                                |
| 6.5     | 6.5                    | 6.2                                |
||
| 9.4     | 9.5                    | 9.3                                |
| 9.1     | 8.9                    | 8.8                                |
| 8.3     | 8.4                    | 8.4                                |
| 7.5     | 7.6                    | 7.7                                |
| 6.6     | 6.8                    | 6.8                                |
| 6.8     | 7.3                    | 7.1                                |
| 5.5     | 5.9                    | 5.8                                |
| 5.7     | 6.1                    | 6.0                                |
| 5.9     | 6.5                    | 6.5                                |
```
1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses
and the care and feeding of livestock (including poultry). Return to table
   * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.
   n.a. Not available.
   Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at
commercial banks.
```

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

Statistical releases

----

HomeEconomic research and dataAccessibilityContact Us
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

v. ) Case No. 1: 09-cr-00030-GZS

)

EDWARD BROWN, )

)

Defendant. )

NOTICE THAT DEFENDANT EDWARD BROWN DOES NOT WAIVE IN-PERSON 

APPEARANCE AT HIS RESENTENCING

Pursuant to the Court’s Order, dated December 27, 2019, in 16-cv-00083-GZS, 

Defendant Edward Brown hereby notifies the Court that he does not waive an in-person 

appearance at his resentencing, and he requests that he be transported back to the District of New 

Hampshire for a to-be-rescheduled sentencing proceeding.

Date: January 11, 2020 Defendant

Edward Brown

By his Attorney,

By: /s/Benjamin L. Falkner

Benjamin L. Falkner 

(NH Bar No. 17686)

KRASNOO, KLEHM & FALKNER LLP

28 Andover Street, Suite 240

Andover, MA 01810

(978) 475-9955

bfalkner@kkf-attorneys.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I served a true and genuine copy of the within motion upon the 

Government via ecf on January 11, 2020.

/s/ Benjamin L. Falkner

Benjamin L. Falkner

Case 1:09-cr-00030-GZS Document 307 Filed 01/11/20 Page 1 of 1