alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

________________ _________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. STEVEN DYKES, a/k/a Steve Dykes, a/k/a Steven Day, Defendant - Appellant. No. 18-1341 (D.C. No. 1:17-CR -00417-RBJ-2) (D. Colo.)

________________ _________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

________________ _________________ Before MATHESON , KELLY , and McHUGH , Circuit Judges.

________________ _________________ Steven Dykes pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commi t mail and wire fraud and one co unt of money laundering . He was sentenced to serve 108 months in prison. Alt hough his plea agreemen t contained a waiv er of his appellate rights, he filed a notice of a ppeal. The government has moved to enforce the appeal waiver in the plea ag reement pursuant to United States v. Hahn , 359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir. 2004) (en b anc) (per curiam).

* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata , and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 1 0th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### December 13, 2018
Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court2 Under Hahn , we consider “(1) whether the disputed appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate r ights; (2) whether the defend ant knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellat e rights; and (3) whether enforc ing the waiver would result in a miscarriage of justice.” Id . at 1325. The government asserts that all of the
Hahn conditions have been satisfied because: (1) Mr. Dykes’ appeal is within the scope of the appeal waiver; (2) he knowingly and voluntarily wa ived his appellate rights; and (3) enforcing the wa iver would not result in a misc arriage of justice. In response to the government’s mo tion, Mr. Dykes concedes that hi s appeal waiver is enforceable under the standards set forth in Hahn , and he agrees that his appeal should be dismissed. Accordingly, we grant the govern ment’s motion to enforce the ap peal waiver and dismiss the appeal. This di smissal does not affect Mr. Dyk es’ right to pursue post-conviction relief on the grou nds permitted in his plea agr eement.

Entered for the Court Per Curiam
#### Gerald Leon WATTS v. STATE of Alabama.

CR-09-1944.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

July 29, 2011.

Debora E. Palmer, Montgomery, for appellant.

Troy King and Luther Strange, attys. gen., and Jack W. Willis, asst. atty. gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM.

WELCH, P.J., and WINDOM and KELLUM, JJ., concur. BURKE, J., concurs specially. JOINER, J., concurs in the result.

BURKE, Judge,

concurring specially.

Although I agree that Gerald Leon Watts has failed to preserve- for appellate review the issue regarding being tried in absentia, I believe that this fact situation, where Watts was removed from the proceedings due to medical reasons and pursuant to the trial court’s direction, distinguishes this case from prior caselaw because he was unable to waive his right to be present. Although this issue was not preserved, the error in fully trying Watts without his presence was egregious and should have been objected to. Watts may have had knowledge of which defense counsel was unaware, and he clearly could have aided in his defense. Although Watts raised specific grounds of ineffectiveness on appeal through a different counsel, these claims have not been addressed on the merits as they were held to be precluded. A Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., petition would be Watts’s first opportunity to raise a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel because Watts’s motion for a new trial was filed by trial counsel. *See Ex parte Ingram,*675 So.2d 863 (Ala.1996) (claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel can be raised in a motion for a new trial or in a postconviction proceeding, whichever presents the first reasonable opportunity to raise such a claim). Thus, I do not believe that Watts has foreclosed his ability to raise in a Rule 32, Ala. R.Crim. P., petition, *1219defense counsel’s1 failure to object to the court’s trying him in absentia.

1

. The record indicates that Watts was represented by two attorneys with the same last name. The transcript refers to defense counsel by only the last name; thus it is unclear if both attorneys were present and participated in the trial.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                 
<ARTICLE>                                  5
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000
                               
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-25-1999
<PERIOD-START>                     DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                       MAR-25-1999
<CASH>                                   9,289
<SECURITIES>                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                           96,878
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0
<INVENTORY>                             99,465
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       216,130
<PP&E>                                 189,357
<DEPRECIATION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         454,015
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   90,155
<BONDS>                                 10,315
<COMMON>                               318,268
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                   0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>           454,015
<SALES>                                121,370
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                       121,370
<CGS>                                   82,360
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          112,139
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         1,627
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         550
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          7,054
<INCOME-TAX>                             2,539
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      4,515
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                             4,515
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0.23

</TABLE>
583 A.2d 318

#### PETER O’KEEFE v. ESSEX COUNTY PARKS.

February 6, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Paul F. DePond, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Annual Report of Notify Technology Corporation on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Notify Technology
Corporation.

                                                By:  /s/ Paul F. DePond
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                Name:  Paul F. DePond
                                                Title: Chief Executive Officer

         I, Gerald W. Rice, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Annual Report of Notify Technology Corporation on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB fairly presents in all material
respects the financial condition and results of operations of Notify Technology
Corporation.

                                                By:  /s/ Gerald W. Rice
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                Name: Gerald W. Rice
                                                Title:Chief Financial Officer
MAJOR GENERAL JOHN Y. YORK JR.John Y. York Jr., was born in 1890 at Yorkville, W.Va. He graduated from the University of West Virginia with a bachelor of science degree in 1918, and received the degree of doctor of jurisprudence following his graduation from the University of Michigan in 1916. He received the degree of master of business administration from Harvard University 1929. He was appointed a second lieutenant, Aviation Section, Signal Reserve, on Nov. 27, 1917, and first lieutenant (temporary) Air Service, on Aug. 21, 1918. He was commissioned a first lieutenant, Air Service, in the Regular Army on July 1, 1920. 
From November 1917 until June 1919 he served successively as student and gunnery officer, Ground Training School; student and later instructor, Armorers School, Kelly Field and Ellington Field, Texas, and Wilbur Wright Field, Ohio. He then became Air Service representative of the Technical Staff, Ordnance Department, Washington, D.C., until August 1921, when he proceeded to Ross Field, Arcadia, Calif., for duty with Balloon Company No. 13. The following November he entered the Air Service Balloon Observers School, Ross Field, Arcadia, Calif., and graduated in May 1922. 
The following June he was ordered to Kindley Field, Fort Mills, Philippine Islands, to join the Balloon Company Coast Defense No. 27. He was transferred to Camp Nichols, Rizal, Philippine Islands, in September 1922, and in April 1923 became post ordnance and armament officer at Camp Nichols. He joined the 28th Bombardment Squadron, Camp Nichols, in July 1923. Returning to the United States he attended the Air Service Primary Flying School, Brooks Field, Texas, from September 1924 until April 1925; then became adjutant, 10th School Group, Kelly Field, Texas. 
In September 1925 he entered the Air Service Balloon and Airship School, Scott Field, Belleville, Ill., and graduated in June 1926. The following September he entered the Army Industrial College, Washington, D.C. and following his graduation in June 1927 was assigned to Scott Field, Ill., for a brief tour of duty. He enrolled in the Harvard School of Business Administration in September 1927, and upon completing the course in June 1929 received the degree of master of business administration. 
He then became chief, Requirements Branch, Industrial War Plans Section, Air Corps Materiel Division, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, in July 1929. He became chief, Production Planning Branch, Industrial War Plans Section, Air Corps Materiel Division, in August 1931. In November 1933 he was named procurement planning representative, New York District, Industrial War Plans Section, Air Corps Materiel Division, until February 1934, when he became an instructor at the Army Industrial College, Washington, D.C.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SUPERGEN,
INC. MARCH 31, 2000 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         119,530
<SECURITIES>                                    10,770
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,115
<ALLOWANCES>                                        10
<INVENTORY>                                      1,434
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               136,162
<PP&E>                                           4,928
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,474
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 166,460
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,938
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       251,540
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,482
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   166,460
<SALES>                                            695
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   839
<CGS>                                              124
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,283
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,539)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,539)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,539)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.27)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from MovieFone,
Inc.'s condensed consolidated financial statements as of and for the three
months ended March 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                       MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                               1,911,713
<SECURITIES>                                         5,311,892
<RECEIVABLES>                                        3,327,927
<ALLOWANCES>                                           111,000
<INVENTORY>                                            368,952
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    11,920,289
<PP&E>                                               7,831,211
<DEPRECIATION>                                       5,673,591
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      17,669,043
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                7,034,966
<BONDS>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                               128,363
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<OTHER-SE>                                          10,505,714
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        17,669,043
<SALES>                                                  2,927
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     6,636,521
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                          974,244
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        40,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (2,826,381)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 (2,826,381)
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                        (2,826,381)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            (0.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            (0.23)
        


</TABLE>
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 Housing and Urban Development

          - [Docket No. FR-5375-N-37]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless.

# DATES:

*Effective Date: September 24, 2010.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathy Ezzell, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 7262, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1234; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with the December 12, 1988 court order in                     *National Coalition for the Homeless*                     v.                     *Veterans Administration,*                     No. 88-2503-OG (D.DC), HUD publishes a Notice, on a weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been determined suitable or unsuitable this week.                

Dated: September 16, 2010.

Mark R. Johnston,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Needs.

[FR Doc. 2010-23580 Filed 9-23-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 92 (Wednesday, June 7, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H5628-H5629]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                      THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T GET IT

  (Mr. WELDON of Florida asked and was given permission to address the 
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speaker, isn't it ironic that the first 
bill the President lost increased spending by $17 billion, and the 
first bill he is going to veto cuts spending by almost $17 billion.
  Where has the President been for the past 2 years? The mandate from 
the people in the last election was clear--cut spending first. Gone are 
the days where out-of-control spending habits are the norm. This new 
Congress is showing that Washington must act responsibly to balance the 
budget. And [[Page H5629]] that means that any increase in spending in 
one area will equal a decrease in another. It is simple accounting.
  The rescission bill provides much-needed disaster assistance to 
people in Oklahoma City and to victims of earthquakes and floods in 40 
States. Yet the President has decided to play politics with these 
disaster victims. By vetoing the rescission bill, thousands of people 
will have their suffering prolonged.
  Mr. Speaker, the President just doesn't get it. The people want us to 
act responsibily and we have.

                          ____________________
```
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. KEVIN THOMAS.

February 6, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

 

U. S. RESTAURANT PROPERTIES, INC. 

SignificantSubsidiaries of the Registrant, U.S. Restaurant Properties, Inc., a Maryland Corporation 

As of December 31, 2004 

 

U.S. Restaurant Properties Operating, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership 

 

USRP Managing, Inc., a Delaware corporation 

 

USRP Funding 2001-A L.P., a Delaware limited partnership 

 

Fuel Supply, Inc., a Texas corporation 

 

USRP Holding Corp., a Texas corporation 

 

USRP (SFGP), LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

USRP Funding 2002-A, L.P., a Texas limited partnership 

 

USRP (SFGP) 2, LLC, a Texas limited liability company 

 

USRP JV1, LLC, a Texas limited liability company 

 

USRP (Hawaii), LLC, a Texas limited liability company 

 

USRP (S&C), LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 

 

USRP (SHO) 1, L.P., a Texas limited partnership
Exhibit 31.2**CERTIFICATIONS**     I, Brent W. Christensen, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Meade Instruments Corp.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingDate: November 27, 2006     By: /s/ Brent W. Christensen       Senior Vice President — Finance and CFO