alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Samuel L. HUCKS, Jr., a/k/a Junie Boy, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 03-6911.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 28, 2003.

Decided Sept. 10, 2003.

Samuel L. Hucks, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Fernando Groene, Office of the United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Samuel L. Hucks, Jr., seeks to appeal from the district court’s order denying his request for equitable tolling and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). *274A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 1039, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), *cert. denied,*534 U.S. 941, 122 S.Ct. 318, 151 L.Ed.2d 237 (2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hucks has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

March 16, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

TIMOTHY DOYLE YOUNG,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ERIC

HOLDER,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-1021

(D.C. No.1:09-CV-02850-ZLW)

ORDER

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. R.

42.1 and 3.3(B).

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1021 Document: 01018385044 Date Filed: 03/16/2010 Page: 1
Exhibit 32.1  Certification
by the Interim Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002  I, Frank Stronach, the Interim Chief Executive
Officer of Magna Entertainment Corp. (MEC), certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
that (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-K (the Report) of MEC for the
year ended December 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and (ii) the
information contained in such Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of MEC.   /s/ FRANK
  STRONACHFrank
  Stronach, Interim Chief Executive Officer  Date:  March 14,
2008  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906
has been provided to Magna Entertainment Corp. and will be retained by Magna
Entertainment Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CHIPPAC, INC.**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003**

 

I, Robert Krakauer, the Chief Financial Officer of ChipPAC, Inc., certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003 of ChipPAC, Inc.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does notcontain 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 thisannual report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, thefinancial 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 thisreport; 

 

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

 

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

 

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof 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 financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscalquarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

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

 

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

 

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Full House Resorts, Inc. for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the Report), I, Andre M. Hilliou, Chief Executive Officer of Full House Resorts, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Full House Resorts, Inc.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |     |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 14, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ ANDRE M. HILLIOU.  
|                         |  |     |  | Andre M. Hilliou       
|                         |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Full House Resorts, Inc. for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) I, James Meier, Chief Financial Officer of Full House Resorts,
Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Full House Resorts, Inc.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |     |  |                        
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Dated: November 14, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ JAMES MEIER.       
|                         |  |     |  | James Meier            
|                         |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 42066

STATE OF IDAHO ,

Plaintiff-Respondent ,

v.

DUANE LEE DOWELL ,

Defendant-Appellant

. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2014 Unpublished Opinion No. 799

Filed: November 5, 2014

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION AND SHALL NOT BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, State of Idaho, Canyon County. Hon. Christopher S. Nye , District Judge.

Judgment of conviction and unified sentence of ten years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years , for sexual abuse of a child under the age of sixteen

years , affirmed

.

Sara B . Thomas, State Appellate Public Defender; Elizabeth A. Allred, Deputy Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Kenneth K. Jorgensen, Deputy Attorney General, Boise, for respondent.

________________________________________________
Before GUTIERREZ, Chief Judge; LANSING, Judge; and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Duane Lee Dowell was convicted of sexual abuse of a child under the age of sixteen

years , Idaho Code § 18

- 1506(1)(b) . The d istrict court sentenced Dowell to a unified term of ten

years, with a minimum period of confinement of five years

. Dowell appeals, contending that his

sentence is excessive.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of revi ew and the

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez , 121 Idaho 114, 117

- 18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014

- 15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez , 106 Idaho 447, 449

- 51, 680 P.2d 869, 871

- 73 (Ct. App.2 1984); State v. Toohill , 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver , 144 Idaho

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Dowell ’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 97-CA-00770-SCT**  **WAL-MART STORES, INC.**

**v. THELMA A. HOWELL**  DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/11/97 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. MARCUS D. GORDON COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: NESHOBA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: EDLEY H. JONES, III ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: JAMES M. MARS, II NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED 10/08/98 MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED: 4/12/99

**BEFORE PRATHER, C.J., BANKS AND WALLER, JJ.**
**WALLER, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:**

**MEMORANDUM OPINION** ¶1. Thelma Howell sued Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., for injuries she sustained while shopping at the Wal-Mart Superstore in Philadelphia, Mississippi. A jury returned a verdict in favor of Howell in the amount of $25, 000.00. Wal-Mart appealed and alleges the following assignments of error: **I. WAL-MART WAS ENTITLED TO A JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW. II. HOWELL FAILED TO SATISFY HER BURDEN OF PROOF AS TO DAMAGES.**  **III. THE JURY VERDICT WAS THE PRODUCT OF BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND IMPROPER PASSION.**  ¶2. A jury question was presented where Brent Garrett, a customer in Wal-Mart at the time Howell slipped, testified as to seeing a liquid on the floor and thereafter searching briefly for a Wal-Mart employee prior to Howell's slipping on the light-colored liquid detergent that was on the floor. There was testimony that Wal-Mart had 180 employees on the floor at the time of the fall, and a store policy that required each employee to check aisles for safety hazards at least five times over a shift. However, there was no testimony that any Wal-Mart employee had conducted a safety sweep of the aisle where Howell fell. It was furtheracknowledged by a manager that the location where Howell fell was more likely to have a spill than other

departments of the store. Although this may be viewed as a somewhat close case, all conflicts in the evidence will be resolved in the plaintiff's favor on appeal where there has been a favorable jury verdict. **Southwest Mississippi Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Lawrence**, 684 So.2d 1257, 1269 (Miss.1996). ¶3. With respect to damages, Howell with no history of prior knee problems, incurred $5,089 in medical bills from treatment that included arthroscopic knee surgery. We cannot say on the basis of the record that the jury verdict of $25,000 was the result of prejudice, bias, fraud or is manifestly against the weight of the evidence. **Sessums v. Northtown Limousines** , **Inc.** 664 So.2d 164, 170 (Miss.1995). ¶4. **AFFIRMED. PRATHER, C.J., SULLIVAN AND PITTMAN, P.JJ., BANKS, ROBERTS, SMITH AND**  **MILLS, JJ., CONCUR. McRAE, J., CONCURS IN RESULT ONLY.**
**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO**

**18        U.S.C. 1350**

|   | (1) | The                  report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or                  15(d) of                  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                  and |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The                  information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  the                  Registrant as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the                  report. |
|--------|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                              |                                                                                                                    |                               |
|---------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------|
| Date:                April                4, 2007 |                                                                                                                         | /s/              Peter B. Jacobson |
|                                              | Peter                B. JacobsonChief                  Executive Officer (Principal Executive                  Officer) |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,773,014
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 81,579,750
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            83,352,764
<PP&E>                                       2,209,331
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,328,247
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              91,582,196
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       34,690,137
<BONDS>                                     27,889,635
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       143,291
<OTHER-SE>                                  28,859,133
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                91,582,196
<SALES>                                     58,786,225
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            58,786,225
<CGS>                                       50,057,759
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               50,057,759
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,415,036
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             669,195
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,732,570
<INCOME-TAX>                                   710,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,022,570
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,022,570
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .18
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .18
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 65708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27084]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

October 21, 2010.
    The Department of Treasury will submit the following public 
information collection requirement to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 on or 
after the publication date of this notice. A copy of the submission may 
be obtained by calling the Bureau Information Clearance Officer listed. 
Comments regarding this information collection should be addressed to 
the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury PRA Clearance Officer, 
Department of the Treasury, 1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 11010, 
Washington, DC 20220.
    Dates: Written comments should be received on or before November 
26, 2010 to be assured of consideration.

Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund

    OMB Number: 1559-0016.
    Type of Review: Revision a currently approved collection.
    Title: New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program Allocation 
Application.
    Form: CDFI 0020.
    Description: The New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) Program will provide 
an incentive to investors in the form of a tax credit, which is 
expected to stimulate investment in private capital that, and in turn, 
will facilitate economic and community development in low-income 
communities. In order to qualify for an allocation of tax credits under 
the NMTC Program an entity must be certified as a qualified community 
development entity and submit an allocation application to the CDFI 
Fund. Upon receipt of such applications, the CDFI Fund will conduct a 
competitive review process to evaluate applications for the receipt of 
NMTC allocations.
    Respondents: Private Sector: Businesses or other for-profits, Not-
for-profit institutions; State, Local, and Tribal Governments.
    Estimated Total Burden Hours: 62,001 hours.
    CDFI Fund Clearance Officer: Michael Jones, Community Development 
Financial Institutions Fund, Department of the Treasury, 601 13th 
Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005; (202) 622-2461.
    OMB Reviewer: Shagufta Ahmed, Office of Management and Budget, New 
Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503; (202) 395-
7873.

Dawn D. Wolfgang,
Treasury PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-27084 Filed 10-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-70-P
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

________________ _________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. ANDREW GIBBS, a/k/a Andrew Lee Gibbs, Defendant - Appellant. No. 22-5020 (D.C. No. 4:21-CR -00144-GKF-1) (N.D. Okla.)

________________ _________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

________________ _________________ Before MATHESON , BACHARACH , and PHILLIPS , Circuit Judges.

________________ _________________ This matter is before us on the parties’ Joint Motion to Remand . The parties agree that the district court constructiv ely amended the indictment via a jury instruction defining sexual cont act, and Appellant Andrew Gi bbs is entitled to relief for plain error. Upon consideration, the Joint Motion to Remand is granted. Mr. Gibbs’ conviction on Count Two is vacated. This a ppeal is dismissed and this matter is

* In light of the parties’ joint motion, oral argument is not necessary, and this matter is submitted on the briefs. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2 ); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This order and judgment is not binding pre cedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It ma y be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### October 20, 2022 Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court Appellate Case: 22-5020 Document: 010110756228 Date Filed: 10/20/2022 Page: 12 remanded with instructions to the district court to enter an amen ded judgment as to County Three only consistent with the Joint Motion to Remand

. The Clerk is directed to issue the mandate forthwith.

Entered for the Court Per Curiam Appellate Case: 22-5020 Document: 010110756228 Date Filed: 10/20/2022 Page: 2