alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Local Rule 47.5.1 provides: "The publication of opinions that have

no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on the basis of wellsettled principles of law imposes needless expense on the public and burdens on

the legal profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________

No. 95-40147

(Summary Calendar)

_______________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ORLANDO GONZALES,

Defendant-Appellant.

_______________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Southern District of Texas

(B-94-CR-95-6)

_______________________________________________

November 24, 1995

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DUHÉ, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:* 

A jury convicted Orlando Gonzales of conspiracy to possess

cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 846, 841(a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A), and of aiding and abetting the

possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21

U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Gonzales was

sentenced to 288 months imprisonment, five years supervised

release, and a $100 special assessment. 
-2-

Gonzales appeals his conviction for aiding and abetting the

possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that there

was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. A conviction

for aiding and abetting the possession of cocaine with the intent

to distribute does not require that Gonzales have actual or

constructive possession of the drugs. United States v. Salazar,

958 F.2d 1285, 1292 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.

Ct. 185, 121 L. Ed. 2d 129 (1992). The jury need only find that

Gonzales' "association and participation with the venture were in

a way calculated to bring about that venture's success." Id.

After having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that there

was sufficient evidence for a jury to make the required finding and

convict Gonzales of this crime.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32(a)**

 

 

**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 accompanyingAnnual Report of ALLTELCorporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (theReport), I, Scott T. Ford, Chief Executive Officer and President of theCompany, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

(1)          TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Scott T. Ford                     |   |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Scott T. Ford                         |   |
| Chief Executive Officer and President |   |
| February 10, 2005                     |   |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to ALLTEL Corporation and will be retained by ALLTEL Corporationand furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

----
**Exhibit31(a)**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Scott T. Ford, ChiefExecutive Officer and President of ALLTEL Corporation, certify that:

 

1.     I have reviewed this annualreport on Form 10-K of ALLTEL Corporation;

 

2.     Based on my knowledge, thisreport does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this 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 ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report;

 

4.     The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure 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 andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)       Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c)       Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

 

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

 

(a)       All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b)       Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date:  March 5, 2004

 

 
| /s/ Scott T. Ford                     |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Scott T. Ford                         |
| Chief Executive Officer and President |

 

----
EXHIBIT 32

                            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 Boundless  Corporation,  a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006
as filed with the U.S.  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof
(the  "Report"),  each of the  undersigned  officers of the Company  does hereby
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 (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 result of operations
            of the Company.

The foregoing certification (i) is given to such officers' knowledge, based upon
such officers'  investigation as such officers reasonably deem appropriate;  and
(ii) is being furnished  solely  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350 (section 906 of
the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) and is not being filed as part of the Report or
as a separate disclosure document.


Dated: May 19, 2006                   /s/ John D. Ryan
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      John D. Ryan
                                      Acting Chief Executive Officer


Dated: May 19, 2006                   /s/ Joseph Gardner
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Joseph Gardner
                                      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document  authenticating,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the signatures
that  appear  in typed  form  within  the  electronic  version  of this  written
statement  required by Section 906, has been  provided to Boundless  Corporation
and will be retained by Boundless Corporation and furnished to the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                    24 of 24
#### Daniel Shannon v. Rebecca Shannon et al.

*Claims against decedents.*

A man cannot maintain a bill in equity against his brother’s estate, after the estate has been closed by distribution, to recover the share for ■which his brother would have been liable, had he lived, upon a mutual contract to support their mother. It is not a case for specific performance and there is no authority to decree payments from distributees in favor of a creditor at large.

Where a decedent’s debts are not secured on property, they must be-enforced under the probate laws.

Appeal from St. Joseph.

Submitted April 12.

Decided April 19.

Bill to enforce payment from an estate under a contract-with decedent.

Dismissal affirmed.

*O. P. Coffinberry*for complainant appellant.

*O. J. Fast*and *Chas. Upson*for defendants.

Estates are-not settled in chancery but in probate proceedings : *Holbrook v. Campau,*22 Mich. 288; *Green v. Probate Judge*40 Mich. 244; *Shelden v. Walbridge*44 Mich. 251; *Dickinson v. Seaver*id. 624; *Pitcher v. Douglas*37 Mich. 341; *Buchoz v. Pray*id. 512: 36 Mich. 429; *Kellogg v. Aldrich*39 Mich. 576; and if the claimant neglects the statutory" *183method he has no remedy at law or in equity: *Winegar v. Newland*44 Mich. 367; *Clark v. Davis 32*Mich. 154; nor can a court of equity create a lien on land to secure a personal debt: *Bennett v. Nichols 12*Mich. *22; Griswold v. Fuller*33 Mich. 268.

Campbell, J.

Complainant filed his bill against defendants, who are widow and heirs of his deceased brother, Wesley Shannon, whose estate has been closed by distribution, claiming that he has a ground of relief arising out of a contract made with decedent in 1872, that they should mutually support their mother, Christina Shannon. The bill sets up the allowance of an account in favor of complainant1 for such support by commissioners of the estate up to the time of its presentation, and his present application is for relief touching what has accrued since, and what may hereafter accrue.

Without going at large into the allegations of the bill, which was demurred to for want of equity, we have not been able to discover a.ny foundation for such a suit. The case is not one for specific performance, and there is no authority to decree payment from distributees by a creditor at large. Debts which are not secured on property must be enforced under the probate laws. We need not consider what remedy may exist in that form in the present condition of affairs. It is very certain that the present suit is anomalous and not maintainable.

The decree dismissing the bill must be affirmed with costs.

The other Justices concurred.
Exhibit 99

                 STRATFORD AMERICAN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
    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 Stratford American Corporation and
Subsidiaries (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), we, Mel L. Shultz, President and Director of the Company, David H.
Eaton, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board and Daniel E. Matthews,
Controller, Secretary and Treasurer 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 the Report fully complies with the requirements of section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Mel L. Shultz
---------------------------------------
Mel L. Shultz, President and Director
November 14, 2002

/s/ David H. Eaton
---------------------------------------
David H. Eaton, Chief Executive
Officer and Chairman of the Board
November 14, 2002

/s/ Daniel E. Matthews
---------------------------------------
Daniel E. Matthews, Controller,
Secretary and Treasurer
November 14, 2002
#### Brookins *v.*The State.

Hill, J.

1. The general rule is that “evidence of the commission of one crime is not admissible upon a trial for another, where the sole purpose is to show that the defendant has been guilty of other crimes, and would therefore be more liable to commit the offense charged.” But *326there are exceptions to this rule; one being that “if the evidence is material and relevant to the issue on trial, it is not inadmissible because it may also tend to establish the defendant’s guilt of a crime other than the one charged.” *Frank*v. *State,*141 *Ga.*243 (2 b) (80 S. E. 1016). On the trial of one indicted for the homicide of his wife, evidence tending to show a previous difficulty between the accused and his wife, about a year prior to the homicide, was admissible as tending to show the existence of a bad state of feeling between them, and as tending to show malice, intent, or motive on the part of the accused in killing his wife. *Starke*v. *State,*81 *Ga.*593 (2) (7 S. E. 807); *Jeffords*v. *State,*162 *Ga.*573 (134 S. E. 169).

No. 6639.

November 15, 1928.

*A. J. Perryman*and *E. B. Pease,*for plaintiff in error.

*George M. Napier, attorney-general, W. R. Flournoy, solicitor-general,*and *T. R. Gress, assistant attorney-general,*contra.

2. The language of the court as set out in ground 2 of the motion for new trial, to which exception is taken, can not, in the light of the note of the trial judge, be construed as an expression of opinion on the part of the court as to what had or had not been proved, and can not be held to be harmful to the accused.

3. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial. *Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32(a)

                                  CERTIFICATION

      In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the
"Report") of Lindsay Manufacturing Co. (the "Company") for the quarter ended
November 30, 2004, I, Richard W. Parod, Chief Executive Officer of the Company
and I, David B. Downing, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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.

        /s/ RICHARD W. PAROD
        --------------------------------
        President and Chief Executive Officer
        Richard W. Parod

        /s/ DAVID B. DOWNING
        --------------------------------
        Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
        David B. Downing

        January 10, 2005

      A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

                                       25
##### 



Exhibit 10.18
 THIRD AMENDMENT
TO
LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT
 th
 Recitals
 A.
 B.
 C.
 D.
 Agreement
 Now, Therefore,
 1. Definitions
 2. Waiver of Potential Default Exhibit A




---



##### 



3. Limitation of Amendments.
 3.1
 3.2
 4. Representations and Warranties
 4.1
 4.2
 4.3
 4.4
 4.5
 2




---



##### 



4.6
 4.7
 5. Counterparts
 6. Effectiveness
  3




---



##### 



In Witness Whereof,
 BORROWER
    
    BANKODIMO INCORPORATED
    
    SILICON VALLEY BANKBy: /s/ Alan Lipton

Name: Alan Lipton

Title: President
    
    By: /s/ Thomas Armstrong

Name: Thomas Armstrong

Title: Vice PresidentASHFORD.COM, INCBy: /s/ Alan Lipton

Name: Alan Lipton

Title: PresidentD.I.A. MARKETING, INCBy: /s/ Alan Lipton

Name: Alan Lipton

Title: President
 4
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 Dimensional Visions Incorporated
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Larry Kohler, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ Larry Kohler
----------------------------------
Larry Kohler
Chief Financial Officer
February 13, 2003
10601.

#### Dollar *v.*City of Thomasville.

Smith, J.

The petition as amended alleged, that the plaintiff was inexperienced as to matters concerning the latent dangers incident to working upon and handling electric wires, and that the defendant employed him with full knowledge of this fact; that he had worked only three weeks for the defendant when he was instructed by its foreman to climb an electric-light pole, carrying with him the loose end of a wire, for the purpose of attaching it to the end of another electric-light wire, which had previously broken. He alleged further that he did not know that there were two wires entwined about the pole, one carrying a positive current and the other a negative current, and that when he reached a point' near where these wires were entwined about the pole ho placed his hand around the pole, that being necessary in climbing, and that his hands came in contact with these twp entwined wires, and that this- together with the loose end of the wire which was held in a metal fixture in his belt completed the circuit and he received a shock which threw l^m to the .ground, some 15 feet away from the pole, causing serious injjury ft) his person, all of which was caused by the negligence of the master in not warning him of these latent dangers. *Held,*that these allegations, taken together with all the other allegations contained in the petition as amended, set out a cause of action, and the trial judge erred in dismissing the suit on general demurrer. See *Western Union Telegraph Co.*v. *Jenkins,*92 *Ga.*398 (17 S. E. 620); *City of Dawson*v. *Smith,*18 *Ga. App.*603 (90 S. E. 76). The eases of *Columbus Railroad Co.*v. *Dorsey,*119 *Ga.*363 (46 S. E. 635), and *Dorsey*v. *Columbus Railroad Co.,*121 *Ga.**478697 (49 S. E. 698), are clearly distinguishable from the case at bar, as is also the case of *Zachery*v. *Madison,*18 *Ga. App.*490 (89 S. E. 594).

Decided November 19, 1919.

Action for damages; from city court of Thomasville—Judge W. H. Hammond. April 9, 1919.

*Titus, Dekle & Hopkins,*for plaintiff.

*J. M. Austin, E. E. Wilco.v,*for defendant.

*Judgment reversed.*

*Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.*
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                          OF CORPORATE GENERAL PARTNER

            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The  undersigned,  Robert A. Bourne,  the  President and Treasurer of CNL Realty
Corporation,  the  corporate  general  partner of CNL Income  Fund V, Ltd.  (the
"Partnership"),  has executed this  certification  in connection with the filing
with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  of the  Partnership's  Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 30,  2004 (the  "Report").  The
undersigned hereby certifies 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 Partnership.

Date:   August 9, 2004               /s/ Robert A. Bourne
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                     Name:  Robert A. Bourne
                                     Title: President and Treasurer

                                    A signed original of this written  statement
                                    required by Section 906 has been provided to
                                    CNL Income Fund V, Ltd. and will be retained
                                    by CNL Income Fund V, Ltd. and  furnished to
                                    the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or
                                    its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          18,563
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   86,183
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,797)
<INVENTORY>                                    113,888
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               226,814
<PP&E>                                         202,220
<DEPRECIATION>                                (88,500)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 661,331
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          203,319
<BONDS>                                        382,981
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                    (89,951)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   661,331
<SALES>                                        425,319
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               425,319
<CGS>                                          261,284
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  261,284
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               142,715
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              45,288
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (21,973)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,858
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (15,531)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (15,531)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>