alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JASON M. WEISKOPF Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 95-02362 Arthur T. Bennett, Judge

No. W2000-02308-CCA-RM-CD - Filed October 11, 2000

This case is before the court upon remand from the Supreme Court of Tennessee for reconsideration in light of State v. Nichols , ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tenn . 2000). Previously , this court found the "weigh and cons ider" jury instruction to be in violation of due process. Nichols reached a con trar y conclusion; therefore, we now affirm the judgment of the trial court. Tenn R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed
J OE G. R ILEY , J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which G ARY R. W ADE , P. J., and D AVID G. H AYES , J., joined. Leslie I. Ballin and Mark A. Mesler, Memphis, Tennessee , for the appellant, Jason M. Weiskopf. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Elizabeth T. Ry an, Assistant Attor

ney Gener

al; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General ; and Thomas D. Henderson, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennesse e.

OPINION Defendant was convicted by a Shelby County

jury of premeditated first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. In the direct appeal, this court found all issues to be without merit except for the jury instruction relating to parole eligibility . Specifically, this court concluded that the jury in

struction authorizi ng the jury

to "weigh and consider the meaning of a sentence of imprisonment" was in violation of due process. State v. Jason M. Weiskopf , No. 02C01-9611-CR

00381, 1998 WL 40672 (Tenn. Crim. App. filed February 4, 1998, at Jackson). Subsequently, the Supreme Court of Tennessee remanded to this court for reconsideration in light of Statev. King , 973 S.W.2d 586 (Tenn. 1998). State v. Jason M. Weiskopf , No. 02C01-9611-CR- 00381, Shelby

County (Tenn. filed November 2, 1998, at Jackson). Upon remand, this court fou nd Kin g to be distinguishable

a nd again concluded the "weigh and consider" jury instruction was in violation of due pro ces s. State v. Jason M. Weiskopf , No. 02C01-9611-CR-00381, 1998 WL 840000 (Tenn. Crim. App. filed Dece

mb er 4, 1 998, at Jackson). The Supreme Court of Tennessee has now1 The present statute d isallows an instruc tion on po ssible penaltie s. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35- 201(b)(Supp.

1999)

. -2- remanded to this court for reconsideration in light of State v. Nichols , ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tenn. 2000), which was filed after this court's last opinion. The trial judge instructe d the jury, pur suant to st atute, tha t the jury coul d "weigh and consider the meaning of a sentence of imprisonment." See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-201(b)(2)(A)(i)(Supp. 1994). 1 The Supreme Court o f Tennessee has

now specifically

declared that this instruction is not in violation of due process. Nichols , ___ S.W.3d at ___. Thus, in accordance

withthe holding of Nichols , the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in all respects.

___________________________________ JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE
#### Seth A. L. Warner et al. v. Charles E. Mason et al.

*Questions of fact.*

The Supreme Court can give no relief against errors committed by the jury-

Error to Alpena. (Green, J.)

Jan. 9.

Jan. 18.

*54Assumpsit. Defendants bring error.

Affirmed.

*J. D. Turnbull*and *J. C. Shields*for appellants.

*J. B. Clayberg*for appellee.

Marston, J.

The present case came before this Court and was disposed of at the April term, 1880. 13 Mich. 110.

We have very carefully examined the record, and compared the charge given with the previous decision of this Court, and are of opinion that there is no want of harmony.

It is very evident that the learned circuit judge closely adhered to the views of this Court, and that the charge was, as to the effect of the retention of the Huff & Yandermeulen note by the plaintiffs, as favorable to the defendants as the facts would warrant. If there was any error committed, it was by the jury and not by the court, and for such error this Court can afford no relief. ‘

The judgment will be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred
Exhibit-31.2 - Certification per Sarbanes-Oxley Act (Section 906)

                             APD ANTIQUITIES, INC.

                           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS


The undersigned, Cindy Swank, President and Director, of APD Antiquities, Inc.
(the "Company") certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended
December 31, 2006 (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:  April 12, 2007

                                       /s/ Cindy Swank
                                           ---------------------------
                                           Cindy Swank
                                           Chief Executive Officer
                                          (Principal Financial Officer)
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the amended annual report of American Cordillera Mining Corp., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K/A for the year ended November 30, 2104, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Frank H. Blair, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Company at the dates and for the periods indicated.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: April 8, 2015

|  

By:

/s/ Frank H. Blair

 

 

Frank H. Blair

 

 

President, CEO, Director |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 44

Designating minority membership on certain standing committees of the

House.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 10, 1997

Mr. UNDERWOOD submitted the following resolution; which was considered

and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating minority membership on certain standing

committees of the House.

1 Resolved, That the following named Member be, and

2 he is hereby, elected to the following standing committee

3 of the House of Representatives:

4 COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT:

5 Mr. Berman.

Æ
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Texas Department of Transportation

,

Appellant,

v.

Genaro F lores

,

Appellee

. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 6

- 00 049

- C V

Appeal from the

171 st District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2014

- DCV1263 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Court Reporter ’ s third request for an extension of time within

which to file the Reporter ’ s Record until May 6 , 201 6

. NO FURTHER REQUESTS

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE THE REPORTER ’ S RECORD WILL BE

CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that Anita D. Garcia , Court Reporter for the 171 st District Court

,

for El Paso County, Texas, prepare the Reporter ’ s Rec ord for the above styled and numbered

cause, and forward the same to this Court on or before May 6

, 201 6

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 26 th day of April , 2016

.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Hughes, JJ.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: Case Number: 

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for:

Attorney name (type or print): 

Firm: 

Street address: 

City/State/Zip: 

Bar ID Number: Telephone Number: 

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

(See item 3 in instructions)

Email Address:

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case?

Are you acting as local counsel in this case?

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar?

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? 

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel

Appointed Counsel 

If appointed counsel, are you 

a 

 Federal Defender

 CJA Panel Attorney

______________________________________________________________________

In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this Court’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 U.S.C.§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath.

Executed on 

Attorney signature: S/

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.)

Revised 8/1/2015

Case: 1:20-cr-00299 Document #: 15 Filed: 07/02/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:25
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-2018
LISA A. MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge. (3:05-cv-00476-REP) Submitted: March 21, 2007 Decided: April 19, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lisa A. Martin, Appellant Pro Se. Tara Louise Casey, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Lisa A. Martin appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and upholding the Commissioner’s finding that Martin is not disabled. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Barnhart , No. 3:05-cv-00476-REP (E.D. Va. Aug. 3, 2005). 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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 438 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 438

    Expressing the sense of the House regarding the transfer to the 
   People's Republic of China of technology that can be used in the 
               development of strategic nuclear missiles.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 14, 1998

     Mr. Ryun (for himself, Mr. Bliley, Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr. 
  Hostettler, Mr. King, Mr. Inglis of South Carolina, Mr. Peterson of 
  Pennsylvania, Mr. Stark, Mr. Pappas, Mr. Hilleary, Mrs. Cubin, Mrs. 
Fowler, Mr. Stump, Mr. Saxton, Mr. Tiahrt, Mr. Dickey, Mr. Snowbarger, 
Mr. Wamp, and Ms. Danner) submitted the following resolution; which was 
          referred to the Committee on International Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing the sense of the House regarding the transfer to the 
   People's Republic of China of technology that can be used in the 
               development of strategic nuclear missiles.

Whereas missile guidance technology has already been transferred to a Chinese 
        company that is involved in the production of strategic nuclear 
        missiles;
Whereas the People's Republic of China has refused to join the 29-nation Missile 
        Technology Control Regime;
Whereas it cannot be certified that the People's Republic of China is not 
        transferring missile technology to Iran, Pakistan, or other nations that 
        have not joined the Missile Technology Control Regime; and
Whereas the People's Republic of China has threatened to use strategic nuclear 
        missiles against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the President and the Congress should act to ensure that no technology 
that can be used to develop strategic nuclear missiles is transferred 
to the People's Republic of China unless--
            (1) the People's Republic of China joins the Missile 
        Technology Control Regime;
            (2) the People's Republic of China guarantees that it does 
        not and will not transfer strategic nuclear or other missile 
        technology to Iran, Pakistan, or other nations that have not 
        joined the Missile Technology Control Regime; and
            (3) the President certifies to the Congress that no such 
        transfer is occurring or is likely to occur.
                                 <all>
```
#### Joe RAMIREZ GUZMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. HUGEE; et al., DefendantsAppellees.

No. 03-16409.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 15, 2004.*

Decided Nov. 24, 2004.

Joe Ramirez Guzman, Corcoran, CA, pro se.

Stephen H. Schmid, Santa Clara County Counsel Office, San Jose, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

*517Before: LEAVY, MCKEOWN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Joe Ramirez Guzman appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in favor of defendant correctional officers in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, alleging misconduct related to an incident with another inmate. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s order granting summary judgment. *See Oliver v. Keller,*289 F.3d 623, 626 (9th Cir.2002). We vacate and remand.

The district court granted summary-judgment based on lack of physical injury, relying on 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e). This is not correct because § 1997e(e) only bars recovery for mental or emotional injuries where there is no physical injury; it does not bar prisoner actions all together merely because there is no physical harm. *See id.*at 630. Accordingly, we vacate the order granting summary judgment and remand to the district court to consider in the first instance the remaining grounds in defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.

VACATED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Patricia A. Bielling","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/pbiellin\/","title":"Statement from NASA\u2019s Jennifer Kunz at SpaceCom, 50th Space Congress","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"ciHdCxAVce\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/statement-from-nasas-jennifer-kunz-at-spacecom-50th-space-congress\/\">Statement from NASA\u2019s Jennifer Kunz at SpaceCom, 50th Space Congress<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/statement-from-nasas-jennifer-kunz-at-spacecom-50th-space-congress\/embed\/#?secret=ciHdCxAVce\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Statement from NASA\u2019s Jennifer Kunz at SpaceCom, 50th Space Congress” — NASA\" data-secret=\"ciHdCxAVce\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/jennifer-kunz.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":413}
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: Case Number: 

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for:

Attorney name (type or print): 

Firm: 

Street address: 

City/State/Zip: 

Bar ID Number: Telephone Number: 

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

(See item 3 in instructions)

Email Address:

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case?

Are you acting as local counsel in this case?

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar?

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? 

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel

Appointed Counsel 

If appointed counsel, are you 

a 

 Federal Defender

 CJA Panel Attorney

______________________________________________________________________

In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this Court’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 U.S.C.§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath.

Executed on 

Attorney signature: S/

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.)

Revised 8/1/2015

Case: 1:20-cv-04108 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/13/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:94
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of United PanAm Financial Corp. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Arash Khazei, certify in my capacity as Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President of
the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (a) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto signed this Certification as of May 2, 2007.



/S/ ARASH KHAZEIArash KhazeiChief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 489 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         June 25, 1998.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 4112) making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal 
year ending September 30, 1999, and for other purposes. The first reading of the 
bill shall be dispensed with. Points of order against consideration of the bill 
for failure to comply with clause 2(l)(6) of rule XI, clause 3 or 7 of rule XXI, 
or section 401 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 are waived. General 
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
for amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. Points 
of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 or 6 
of rule XXI are waived except as follows: page 10, line 1 through line 10. No 
amendment shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee 
on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each amendment may be considered only in 
the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in 
the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time 
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment. All points of order against 
amendments printed in the report are waived. The Chairman of the Committee of 
the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further consideration in the 
Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) 
reduce to five minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any postponed 
question that follows another electronic vote without intervening business, 
provided that the minimum time for electronic voting on the first in any series 
of questions shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill 
for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```