alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, December 1, 2020 1

OSAC RESEARCH NEEDS ASSESSMENT FORM

Title of research need: Forensic Pathologist and Forensic Anthropologist Partnerships in Medical 

Examiner / Coroner Offices

Keyword(s): Forensic Pathologist, Forensic Anthropologist, Partnership

Submitting subcommittee(s): MDI Date Approved: 2/28/2021

(If SAC review identifies additional subcommittees, add them to the box above.)

Background Information:

1. Does this research need address a gap(s) in a current or planned standard? (ex.: Field identification system 

for on scene opioid detection and confirmation)

Not at this time.

2. Are you aware of any ongoing research that may address this research need that has not yet been published 

(e.g., research presented in conference proceedings, studies that you or a colleague have participated in but 

have yet to be published)?

No.

3. Key bibliographic references relating to this research need: (ex.: Toll, L., Standifer, K. M., Massotte, D., eds. 

(2019). Current Topics in Opioid Research. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA. doi: 10.3389/978-2-88963-180-3)

None.

4. Review the annual operational/research needs published by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) at 

https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/forensic-science-research-and-development-technology-working-groupoperational#latest? Is your research need identified by NIJ?

No.

5. In what ways would the research results improve current laboratory capabilities?

There are less than 50 board-certified forensic anthropologists within medical examiner / coroner offices. 

Forensic anthropologists provide critical information to forensic pathologists, including but not limited to

identification, trauma analysis, research. It is our understanding that there is not standardized training to 

become a forensic anthropologist nor are their tiered certification levels. The addition of standardized training 

and tiered certification levels will allow forensic anthropologists to provide their expertise to medicolegal death 

investigations and postmortem examinations.

6. In what ways would the research results improve understanding of the scientific basis for the 

subcommittee(s)?

Forensic anthropologists can often be a huge asset to medicolegal death investigators at the death scene, 

especially death scenes where the decedent is decomposed or burned.
FINAL by: OSAC Program Office; Version 2, December 1, 2020 2

7. In what ways would the research results improve services to the criminal justice system?

Forensic anthropologists provide critical insight in trauma analysis, which can provide additional information 

for the criminal justice system.

8. Status assessment (I, II, III, or IV): I

Major gap in 

current 

knowledge

Minor gap in 

current 

knowledge

No or limited

current research is 

being conducted I III

Existing current 

research is being 

conducted II IV

This research need has been identified by one or more subcommittees of OSAC and is being provided as an 

informational resource to the community.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

ORDER APPROVING THE 

AMENDMENT OF RULE 1128 OF 

THE PENNSYLVANIA

RULES OF JUVENILE COURT

PROCEDURE

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

NO. 851

SUPREME COURT RULES

DOCKET 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 14th day of October, 2020, upon the recommendation of the 

Juvenile Court Procedural Rules Committee, the proposal having been submitted 

without publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(3):

It is Ordered pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania 

that Rule 1128 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure is amended in 

the attached form.

This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall 

be effective on January 1, 2021.

Additions to the rule are shown in bold and are underlined.

Deletions from the rule are shown in bold and brackets.
#### William Stewart v. Josiah A. Riopelle.

*Titles of statutes.*

The constitutional provision that the object of an act shall be expressed in its title has nothing to do with acts previously passed or with the headings of chapters in the Compiled Laws.

*178The Compiled Laws are not an original enactment or a re-enactment of the statutes-compiled, and have no force except as a compilation of existing statutes properly arranged, and not altered.

Case made from Wayne.

Submitted April 11.

Decided April 19.

Case. Defendant bad judgment.

Reversed.

*JB. T. Prentis*and *Moore dé Moore*for appellant.

*Ward c& Palmer*for appellee.

Campbell, J.

This action was brought to recover a penalty of $200 against defendant, who was a deputy sheriff of Wayne county, for refusing for more than six hours to deliver to plaintiff a copy of a warrant under which he had arrested him, after demand and tender of legal fees.

The case was made out by testimony in the court below, but the court ordered a verdict for defendant, which is now sought to be justified on- the ground that the law is unconstitutional because including more than one subject, and not including this subject under its title. Comp. L. § 7042.

The point is made that this section is included in the Compiled Laws in a general chapter relating to writs of *habeas corpus*and *cerüorcvri,*and that there is nothing under these heads or under any of the sub-titles of the chapter relating to such an action as this.

But the Compiled Laws are in no sense a re-enactment or an original enactment of the provisions contained in them. The Constitution expressly forbids a revision of the laws, and in providing for a compilation confines it to existing laws; and the approval of it is made by commissioners and not by the Legislature. Const. art. 18 § 15. It is the original law which continues to exist, and the Compiled Laws have no force except as a compilation of existing statutes properly arranged but not altered.

There is nothing in the Constitution applying the rule of single subjects and explicit titles to any but future legislation. The statute now in controversy is an ancient one, *179which has been adopted in this State under both revisions •of 1838 (p. 519) and 1816 (p. 586) as a part of the *habeas corpus*act; and it is a very important safeguard against wrongful arrests, which the courts are bound to enforce. It is too clear and precise to leave any room for construction. The plaintiff ought to have recovered the penalty.

The judgment must be reversed with costs and a new ■trial granted.

The other Justices concurred.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         100,112
<SECURITIES>                                11,755,975
<RECEIVABLES>                                  382,092
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,671
<PP&E>                                       4,176,566
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,012,443
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              15,419,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          419,070
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,000,903
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                15,419,973
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               312,685
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   93,703
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                218,982
<INCOME-TAX>                                   218,982
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            218,982
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   218,982
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
From: Jennifer Kurtz

Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022

To: CSF-SCRM-RFI

Cc: Paulsen, Celia (Fed)

Subject: RFI: Evaluating and Improving Cybersecurity Resources: The Cybersecurity Framework and

Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management.

Dear NIST Team,

Thank you for inviting public comment on “RFI: Evaluating and Improving Cybersecurity Resources:

The Cybersecurity Framework and Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management.” I reference the CSF

in my conversations and briefings to clients, both those within the DoD/aerospace supply chain and those

outside that and other more highly regulated manufacturing industry sectors. It's simple to grasp and yet

subtle to achieve. Here are my comments:

● For manufacturers, I believe it would be helpful to have cybersecurity principles and controls

expanded or explained using quality management or OSHA terminology. This would help

demystify cybersecurity guidance and lower the barrier to understanding and acceptance. It would

also encourage service providers to think like manufacturers rather than like advocates for a

specific technical solution.

● Incorporate the look and feel of NIST HB 162 in a companion piece. The ideas and comments

published emphasize the need for connecting the dots between control statement and real-world

implementation. More manufacturing and other implementation scenarios would be helpful.

● Include in the guidance references to reading legal documents pertaining to third-party service

providers, cyber insurance riders, and the like. When I ask cyber or business leads about the

contract terms the response is often "I'll have to look."

● I still would love to see states include cybersecurity information and the requirement for both a

system security plan and incident response plan as part of the business registration process. It

would not be complicated to include templates for policy documents and plans on the state web

portal.

● Expand the discussion of an IT asset register to include a data repository analysis that looks at all

the business information system resources and identifies the level of interest, as it were, in terms

of data criticality (to the business' survival), data sensitivity (this would include notes about PHI.

PII, ITAR, CUI, etc. and whether it is rated as high/medium/low for a given characteristic), and

data recoverability. (Reference: NIST SP 800-61r2)

● The specific and well-developed comments from Gideon Rasmussen are superb.

Thank you and good luck on this important work,

Jennifer

Jennifer Kurtz, MBA, PMP

Cyber Program Director

Author, Hacking Wireless Access Points: Cracking, Tracking, and Signal Jacking

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE:

NIST MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNER
Exhibit
32.2
 
 SECTION
906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
  Certification
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
  In
connection with the Annual Report of HuntMountain Resources Ltd. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on or about the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Bryn Harman, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, 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 the Company.
  A signed
original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon
request.
  /s/
      Bryn HarmanBryn
      HarmanChief
      Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer)
  Date:
June 4, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                      18,593,964
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               45,784,205
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,882,867)
<INVENTORY>                                 53,131,285
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           128,196,920
<PP&E>                                      15,547,171
<DEPRECIATION>                             (4,407,619)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             200,569,636
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       42,763,803
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    976,755
<COMMON>                                       145,059
<OTHER-SE>                                 154,680,585
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               200,569,636
<SALES>                                     99,157,840
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            99,157,840
<CGS>                                       67,678,533
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               67,678,533
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            28,772,872
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              89,701
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,986,684
<INCOME-TAX>                               (1,194,674)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,792,010
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,792,010
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .12
        

</TABLE>
##### 



POWER OF ATTORNEY
  nd
 MERCK & CO., Inc.By
    /s/ Richard T. ClarkRichard T. Clark(Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer) /s/ Richard T. Clark
    
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive OfficerRichard T. Clark
    
    (Principal Executive Officer; Director)/s/ Peter N. Kellogg
    
    Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerPeter N. Kellogg
    
    (Principal Financial Officer)/s/ John Canan
    
    Senior Vice President and ControllerJohn Canan
    
    (Principal Accounting Officer)
 DIRECTORS/s/ Johnnetta B. Cole
    
    
    
    /s/ Rochelle B. LazarusJohnnetta B. Cole
    
    
    
    Rochelle B. Lazarus/s/ Thomas H. Glocer
    
    
    
    /s/ Thomas E. ShenkThomas H. Glocer
    
    
    
    Thomas E. Shenk/s/ Steven F. Goldstone
    
    
    
    /s/ Anne M. TatlockSteven F. Goldstone
    
    
    
    Anne M. Tatlock/s/ William B. Harrison, Jr.
    
    
    
    /s/ Samuel O. ThierWilliam B. Harrison, Jr.
    
    
    
    Samuel O. Thier/s/ Harry R. Jacobson
    
    
    
    /s/ Wendell P. WeeksHarry R. Jacobson
    
    
    
    Wendell P. Weeks/s/ William N. Kelley
    
    
    
    /s/ Peter C. WendellWilliam N. Kelley
    
    
    
    Peter C. Wendell
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alvaro VARGAS-HIDALGO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 99-50733.

D.C. No. CR-99-00101-MMM.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 14, 2001.*

Decided May 29, 2001.

Before PREGERSON, FERNANDEZ and WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Alvaro Vargas-Hidalgo appeals his 92-month sentence imposed by the district court following his conviction of being an illegal alien found in the United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Vargas-Hidalgo’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and has moved to withdraw as counsel of record. VargasHidalgo did not file a pro se supplemental brief. Having conducted an independent review of the record pursuant to *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 83-84, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we conclude that there are no arguable appellate issues. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 25, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40189

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARLOS ESTRELLA-CAMBRANIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CR-680-ALL 

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

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER Curiam:*

Carlos Estrella-Cambranis appeals his guilty-plea conviction

of illegal reentry and his sentence of 18 months of imprisonment

and three years of unsupervised release. Estrella-Cambranis

challenges the constitutionality of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b). 

Estrella-Cambranis’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998). 

Although Estrella-Cambranis contends that Almendarez-Torres was

incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court

would overrule Almendarez-Torres in light of Apprendi v. New
No. 06-40189

-2-

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such

arguments on the basis that Almendarez-Torres remains binding. 

See United States v. Garza-Lopez, 410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 298 (2005). Estrella-Cambranis properly

concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of

Almendarez-Torres and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to

preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.
#### Malik MUMIT, Appellant, v. Larry NORRIS, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, Appellee.

No. 00-4062.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted May 30, 2001.

Filed June 4, 2001.

Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Malik Mumit appeals the district court’s1 dismissal with prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the *396verdict, we conclude that the Arkansas Court of Appeals’ determination that there was sufficient evidence as to each element of Ark.Code Ann. § 5—13—201 (a)(7) (Michie 1997) was neither contrary to nor an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court. *See Copeland v. Washington,*232 F.3d 969, 973, 976-77 (8th Cir.2000), ce*rt. denied,*2001 WL 243390 (U.S. May 14, 2001) (No. 00-8754).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

1

. The Honorable William R. Wilson, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
#### The Commonwealth *v.*Falls City Tobacco Bank.

Banks and Banking — Statute Amending Charters.

The provisions of the Act of Feb. 17, 1858, entitled “An Act amending the charters of the several banks of Kentucky,''’ do not apply to hanks incorporated subsequent to the taking effect of such act, since charters not in existence could not be amended.

APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT.

May 23, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The act of February 17, 1858, entitled “An act amending the charters of the several banks of Kentucky.”

The first section provides “That the net amount of the surplus accumulated profit of each of the incorporated banks of this commonwealth shall be taxed at the same rate at which the capital stock of said bank is now taxed by law, which shall be paid in the same manner as the tax on the capital.”

The natural import of this language is that the act was to amend the charters of existing banks, and to leave to the legislature the duty of prescribing the amount of taxation to- which banks subsequently chartered should be subjected. The net amounts of accu- ■ mulated profits’to be taxed were the accumulated profits of the banks of the commonwealth then incorporated. But if the language and structure of the section leaves this a matter of doubt, this doubt is removed by reference to the title of the act. The legislature therein declared its object to1 be the “amendment of the charters of the several banks of Kentucky.” Charters which had not then been granted could not from the very nature of things be amended.

The act does not declare that its provisions shall apply to charters thereafter granted, and its title utterly forbids that they shall be so applied. ■

The Falls City Tobacco Bank was not incorporated until January 21, 1865, hence it is not bound to observe the requirements of the act of February, 1858.

*684
      *Rodman & Thompson, for appellant.*

*Pendell, for appellee.*

, The demurrers to appellant’s petition and amended petition were properly sustained and said petitions properly dismissed.

Judgment *affirmed.*
10313.

#### Hutchins *v.*Watkins *et al.*

Decided October 9, 1919.

Complaint; from Crisp superior court—E. F. Strozier, judge pro hac vice. December 5, 1918.

*J. T. Hill,*for plaintiff in error. *Crum & Jones,*contra.

Bloodwobth, J.

“The motion for new trial in this case contained the usual general grounds only, and there being evidence to sustain the verdict, this court cannot disturb the finding of the jury by overruling the refusal of the trial judge to grant a new trial upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to evidence or without evidence to support it. *Davis*v. *Kirkland,*1 *Ga. App.*5 (58 S. E. 209); *Stricklin*v. *Crawley,*1 *Ga. App.*139 (58 S. E. 215); *Charles*v. *Brooker,*1 *Ga. App.*219 (58 S. E. 218); *Daughtry*v. *Savannah & Ry. Co.,*1 *Ga. App.*393 (58 S. E. 230); *Edge*v. *Thomas,*9 *Ga. App.*559 (71 S. E. 875).” *McCarty*v. *Keys,*19 *Ga. App.*494 (91 S. E. 875); *Bradham*v. *State,*21 *Ga. App.*510 (94 S. E. 618), and cases cited.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.*
EXHIBIT 23.2
 
 
 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
 
 
 As independent engineering consultants, Joe C. Neal & Associates, hereby consents to the use of the name Joe C. Neal & Associates and references to Joe C. Neal & Associates and to the inclusion of and references to our report, or information contained therein, entitled “Evaluation of Oil and Gas Reserves, Mexco Energy Corporation Annual Report Effective Date: March 31, 2010” prepared for Mexco Energy Corporation in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mexco Energy Corporation for the filing dated on or about June 29, 2010 and our report attached as Exhibit 99.1 to Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mexco Energy Corporation for the year ended March 31, 2010 filed on Form 10-K/A on or about January 28, 2011.
 
 
 /s/ Joe C. Neal & Associates
 JOE C. NEAL & ASSOCIATES,
 PETROLEUM AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
 
 Midland, Texas
 January 28, 2011