alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4.

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-50298 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. PRESCILIANO AGUILAR-LOPEZ, also known as Presciliano Aguilar, also known as Presiliano Lopez Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:07-CR-671-ALL
Before JOLLY, BARKSDALE, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Presciliano Aguilar-Lopez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Al mendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), whic h held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. United States v. PinedaArrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 872 (2008). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D October 8, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RICARDO LORENZO MACIAS, JR.,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 17

- 00144

- CR

Appeal from

120th District Court

of El Paso Cou nty, Texas

(TC # 20130D03635 )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decision shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 2 8TH DAY OF AUGUST , 2019.

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodrigue z, and Palafox, JJ.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13** 
**- 6642** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,
Plaintiff

– Appellee ,

v.

KENNETH JUNIOR SMITH ,
Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Spartanburg

. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 7:98

- cr
- 01169

- HMH

- 1 )

Submitted : August 22, 2013 Decided: August 27, 2013

Before MOTZ, DIAZ , and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Kenneth Junior Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, Assistant U nited S tates Attorney , Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee

.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Junior Sm ith appeals the district court ’ s

denial of his Fed. R. Crim. P. 36 motion to clarify the oral
pronouncement of his sentence

. We have reviewed the record and
find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the denial of

Smith’s motion . We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before th is court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-628

In Re: JOHNNIE N. ROWE,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CR-94-11821, CR-94-20097)

Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 14, 1998

Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Johnnie N. Rowe, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Johnnie Rowe, a North Carolina inmate, filed this petition for

a writ of mandamus asking this court to compel the district court

to address on the merits his motion to dismiss his criminal

conviction. The granting of a writ of mandamus is a drastic remedy

to be used in extraordinary circumstances. See In re Beard, 811

F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). A petitioner must show that he has

a clear right to the relief sought, that the respondent has a clear

duty to perform the act requested by petitioner, and that there is

no other adequate remedy available. See In re First Fed. Sav. &

Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Rowe has failed to

make the requisite showing for such extraordinary relief. Accordingly, we deny his petition for a writ of mandamus. 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.

PETITION DENIED
Order entered December 21 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 01539 - CR DEVANTE JEROME FOSTE R, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 2 65th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F14 - 31115 - R



### O RDER On July 6, 2016, seven volumes of reporter’s record were filed in this appeal

. Volume 4, however, was from another appeal involving trial court cause number F14

- 57 284 . On December 19, 2016, the correct volume 4 was filed in this case. We STRIKE the volume 4 of the reporter’s record filed on July 6, 2016, bearing the trial court number F14

- 57284. This case is at issue and will be set for submission in due course.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
#### Ronald Kelly v. George Gartner, Circuit Judge of Wayne County.

*Equity practice*— Examination *of witnesses in open court.*

The right to an examination of the witnesses in a chancery suit in open court cannot be claimed until the cause is at issue as to all of the defendants, or until those who have not answered have been defaulted; citing *Lumber Co. v. Gfustin,*54 Mich. :264.1

*Mandamus.*

Argued February 9, 1892.

Granted February 10, 1892.

Belator is one of several defendants in a cause pending in the Wayne circuit court, in chancery. Complainant, at a time when the cause was at issue as to all of the defendants but J., demanded an examination of wit-messes in open court. Subsequently, and on December *It,*1891, the demurrer of J. to the bill was overruled, -with leave to answer, the cause to stand for hearing at vthe January term, 1893, and the answer of J. was filed December 38. On December 19 notice that the cause ■would be brought on for hearing at the January term was served by complainant’s ‘ counsel, and the cause was placed on the docket; whereupon relator applied for *•mandamus*to strike the case therefrom.

*Ronald Kelly, in pro. per. (W. F. Atkinson,*of counsel), for relator.

*C. S. McDonald,*for respondent.

1

 See *Bussey v. Bussey,*71 Mich. 504; *Gray v. Franks,*86 Id. 382.

Per Curiam.

This motion is ruled by *S. C. Hall Lumber Co. v. Gustin,*54 Mich. 624.

*265A party cannot demand an examination in open court of witnesses in a chancery case until the cause is at issue as to all of the defendants, or until those who have not answered are defaulted.

Writ granted.
Exhibit 8.1  List of Subsidiaries of Cnova N.V.  Name of Subsidiary

Jurisdiction of Incorporation or   Organization

Ownership InterestCnova Finança   B.V.

The Netherlands

100
%3W Santé SAS

France

91.95
%3W SAS

France

99.40
%C Distribution   (Thailand) Ltd

Thailand

41.92
%CD Africa SAS

France

84.84
%Cdiscount Afrique S.A.S.

France

99.81
%Cdiscount   Colombia S.A.S.

Colombia

50.94
%Cdiscount Cote   dIvoire SAS

Ivory Coast

84.84
%Cdicount   Cameroun SAS

Cameroon

84.84
%Cdiscount   Group S.A.S.

France

99.81
%Cdiscount   International BV

The Netherlands

99.81
%Cdiscount SA

France

99.40
%Cdiscount   Senegal SAS

Senegal

84.84
%C-Discount   Vietnam Co Ltd

Vietnam

47.91
%Cdiscount   Voyages SAS

France

99.40C-Distribution   Asia Pte. Ltd

Singapore

59.89
%CLatam SA

Uruguay

69.87
%Cnova Comércio Eletrônico S.A. (Nova OpCo)

Brazil

100
%Cnova France   SAS

France

100
%ECDISCOC   COMERCIALIZADORA S.A.

Ecuador

69.91
%E-Cavi Ltd

Hong Kong

47.91
%E-Hub Consultoria, Participações e Comércio.S.A.

Brazil

100
%E-Trend SAS

France

99.81
%Financière MSR   SAS

France

99.81
%


Name of Subsidiary

Jurisdiction of Incorporation or   Organization

Ownership InterestMoncorner SAS   (f/k/a Anapold SAS)

France

99.40
%Moncornerdeco.com   SAS

France

75.33
%Nova Experiência Pontocom S.A

Brazil

100
%Cdiscount Panama S.A.

Panama

69.87
%
IV 

House Calendar No. 185 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1017 

[Report No. 115–978] 

Requesting the President, and directing the Secretary of State, to transmit 

to the House of Representatives copies of all documents, records, communications, transcripts, summaries, notes, memoranda, and read-aheads 

in their possession referring or relating to certain communications between President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 24, 2018 

Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 

Reported adversely, referred to the House Calendar, and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Requesting the President, and directing the Secretary of 

State, to transmit to the House of Representatives copies 

of all documents, records, communications, transcripts, 

summaries, notes, memoranda, and read-aheads in their 

possession referring or relating to certain communications between President Donald Trump and President 

Vladimir Putin. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1017 RH 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives requests 

2 the President, and directs the Secretary of State, to trans3 mit to the House of Representatives, not later than 14 

4 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution, cop5 ies of every document, record, communication, transcript, 

6 summary, note, memorandum, and read-ahead in the pos7 session of the President or the Secretary of State, respec8 tively, that refer or relate to matters proposed, discussed, 

9 agreed to or otherwise covered during, in connection with, 

10 or in preparation for communications between President 

11 Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, 

12 Finland on July 15 or July 16, 2018. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
House Calendar No. 185 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1017 

[Report No. 115–978] 

RESOLUTION 

Requesting the President, and directing the SecVladimir Putin. between President Donald Trump and President referring or relating to certain communications memoranda, and read-aheads in their possession communications, transcripts, summaries, notes, resentatives copies of all documents, records, retary of State, to transmit to the House of RepSEPTEMBER 25, 2018 

Reported adversely, referred to the House Calendar, and 

ordered to be printed 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
----

|  | (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 Registrant. |
|--|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ Michael Ruggeri |                    |
|---------------------|-------------------------|
| Name:               | Michael Ruggeri         |   |
| Title:              | Chief Financial Officer |   |

----
#### Ralph K. MOORE (78-1164), Blue Ridge Transportation Company, Inc. (78-1165), Petitioners-Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, (78-1164/5), Respondent-Appellee.

No. 78-1164, 78-1165.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

April 23, 1980.

Perry Shields, Bernstein, Dougherty *&*Susano, W. P. Boone Dougherty, Knoxville, Tenn., for petitioners-appellants.

M. Carr Ferguson, Richard Farber, Asst. Atty. Gen., Gilbert E. Andrews, Mary Jennings, Tax Div., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Stewart E. Seigel, Chief Counsel, Internal Revenue Service, Washington, D. C., for respondent-appellee.

Before LIVELY, MARTIN and JONES, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

On November 19,1971, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (the “Commissioner”) mailed a deficiency notice to the Appellants with respect to their 1963 and 1964 return. At the time the deficiency notices were mailed to Appellants, the period for assessment of an income tax deficiency for 1963 against the Moores, and for 1963 and 1964 against the Blue Ridge Transportation Company had expired unless fraudulent returns were filed. 26 U.S.C. § 6501(c)(1). Similarly, the period for assessment of a deficiency for 1964 against the Moore’s had expired unless a fraudulent return was filed or unless gross income was understated by 25 percent.

Appellants appeal from an Order of the United States Tax Court, assessing deficiencies and penalties for Appellants’ filing of fraudulent income tax returns, 26 U.S.C. § 6501. We affirm.

Both parties agree that the Commissioner has the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that Appellants intentionally designed to evade a tax believed to be owing. Fraud with intent to evade a tax may be shown by circumstantial evidence, including, *inter alia,*evidence of false bookkeeping entries and conduct calculated to conceal sources of income and to avoid the making of normal business records. *Spies v. United States,*317 U.S. 492, 494, 63 S.Ct. 364, 365, 87 L.Ed. 418 (1943). Based upon our review of the record and the Tax Court’s findings of fact, we believe that the Tax Court’s holding that the Appellants filed fraudulent income tax returns was not erroneous.

Accordingly, the judgment of the Tax Court is hereby affirmed.
Exhibit 31

Certifications

I, Paul
Vanderslice, certify that:

1.    I have reviewed this 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 Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-GC23 (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 annual report;

3.    Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing 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.    Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) 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 servicing agreements 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: Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Association; Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC; Trimont Real Estate Advisors, Inc.; Deutsche Bank Trust
Company Americas; Wells Fargo Bank, National Association; CWCapital Asset Management LLC; CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc.; National Tax Search, LLC; Berkadia Commercial Mortgage LLC; and Pentalpha Surveillance LLC.

Date: March 30, 2018



|                                                                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                       
|/s/ Paul Vanderslice                                                                                                                   
|Paul Vanderslice President, Citigroup
Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc. (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)

CGCMT 2014-GC23 Sarbanes-Oxley Certification (2017)
585 A.2d 347

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BOBBY LEE WOODALL.

July 10, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

SETH RICKY KIRK, 

Appellant, 

v. Case No. 5D21-2346

LT Case No. 2020-CF-1340-A

STATE OF FLORIDA, 

Appellee. 

________________________________/

Decision filed May 10, 2022

Appeal from the Circuit Court

for Citrus County, 

Richard A. Howard, Judge.

Matthew J. Metz, Public Defender,

and Edward J. Weiss, Assistant 

Public Defender, Daytona Beach, 

for Appellant. 

Seth Ricky Kirk, Sneads, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Whitney Brown 

Hartless, Assistant Attorney 

General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM. 

AFFIRMED. 

EVANDER, COHEN and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk March 23, 2009

0316 

# Order

March 23, 2009

137976

DONALD ANGLIN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 137976 COA: 287097 WCAC: 07-000303 DELPHI AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the November 17, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
EXHIBIT 31.2



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, AS AMENDED



I, Ronald J. Patrick, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of DrugMax, Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this 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 report;



|                          |  |     |  |                                                         
|------------------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|Dated: September 28, 2004 |  | By: |  | /s/ Ronald J. Patrick                                   
|                          |  |     |  | Ronald J. Patrick                                       
|                          |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer
584 A.2d 222

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RAYMOND KLOTZ.

May 21, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
585 A.2d 323

#### IN THE MATTER OF ROBERT M. DOSWELL, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

February 11, 1991.

ORDER

The Office of Attorney Ethics having petitioned the Supreme Court for an order temporarily suspending ROBERT M. DOS-WELL of IRVINGTON from the practice of law pursuant to *R.*l:20-5(b), and for restraints on the disbursal of funds from all accounts maintained pursuant to *R.*1:21-6, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that ROBERT M. DOSWELL of IRVING-TON, admitted to practice in this State in 1986, is temporarily suspended from the practice of law, effective immediately, and until further order of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that the Office of Attorney Ethics take such protective action pursuant to *R.*l:20-ll(c), as may be appropriate to gain possession and control of the legal files, records, practice and trust assets of ROBERT M. DOSWELL wherever situate, pending further order of this Court; and it is further

*293ORDERED that all funds, if any, presently existing in any New Jersey financial institution, pursuant to *R.*1:21-6 shall be restrained from disbursement except upon application to this Court, for good cause shown, pending the further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that ROBERT M. DOSWELL show Cause before this Court on February 26, 1991 at 2:00 p.m. in the Supreme Court Courtroom, Hughes Justice Complex, Trenton, why the temporary suspension and restraints herein should not continue pending final disposition of any complaints against him and until further order of the Court and further why the trust funds maintained by ROBERT M. DOSWELL restrained from disbursement by this Order, should not be transmitted by the financial institutions that are the present custodians to the Clerk of the Superior Court for deposit in the Superior Court Trust Fund pending further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent may move prior to the return date of this Order to Show Cause, on an application for good cause shown, for modification of this Order or the restraints contained herein; and it is further

ORDERED that David E. Johnson, Jr., Esquire, or his designee, shall present this matter to the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that ROBERT M. DOSWELL be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent comply with Administrative Guideline No. 23 of the Office of Attorney Ethics governing suspended, disbarred or resigned attorneys.
|    |                                                                                                                               |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cole Office & Industrial REIT (CCIT III), Inc.; |
|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this 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 report. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |
| Date:  | April 27, 2020 | /s/ RICHARD S. RESSLER |
|   |   | Name: | Richard S. Ressler |
|   |   | Title: | Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board of Directors(Principal Executive Officer) |