alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
 
                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
    As Independent Public Accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated February 3, 1998, appearing on page 60 of the 1997
Annual Report to Shareholders, which is incorporated in the Form 10-K, into the
Company's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-29657,
333-34609, 33-60406, and 33-39466) and on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-19671, 333-29819,
33-50260, 33-45074 and 33-52094). We also consent to the incorporation of our
report dated February 3, 1998, on the Financial Statement Schedule, appearing on
page 19 of the Form 10-K. It should be noted that we have not audited any
financial statements of UtiliCorp United Inc. subsequent to December 31, 1997,
or performed any audit procedures subsequent to the date of our reports.
 
/s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
Kansas City, Missouri
March 19, 1998
 
                                       31
Order entered August 21, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00389-CV

IN RE CHARLES ANTHONY ALLEN, Relator

On Appeal from the 292nd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV99-01573-V

ORDER

The Court has received correspondence from the relator dated August 18, 2014

requesting that the Court reconsider its dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We 

treat the correspondence as a motion for rehearing. 

The relator is incarcerated because he was found guilty of the criminal offenses of

robbery and violating a protective order. Allen v. State, No. 05-01-00812-CR, 2002 WL 

1286508, at *4 (Tex. App.—Dallas June 12, 2002, pet. ref'd, untimely filed). On March 27, 

2014, he filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus contending that his due process rights were 

violated in conjunction with the granting of the protective order. The Court dismissed relator’s 

petition for writ of habeas corpus on April 17, 2014 on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction over 

relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus because this Court’s habeas corpus jurisdiction is 

limited to challenges to incarceration on judgments of contempt rendered in civil cases and does 

not extend to cases in which violation of an order in a civil case is an element of the criminal 
charge. In re Allen, No. 05-14-00389-CV, 2014 WL 1533207, at *1 (Tex. App.—Dallas Apr. 

17, 2014, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.); see also McBride v. State, 114 S.W.3d 556, 557 (Tex. 

App.—Austin 2002, no pet. (“[T]he court of criminal appeals alone among the courts of Texas 

has authority to release from confinement persons who have been finally convicted of noncapital 

felonies.”).

On July 16, 2014, relator filed a petition for a bill of review, which the Court treated as a 

motion for rehearing because neither the rules of appellate procedure nor case law provide for an 

out of time attack on an appellate judgment by bill of review. In re Allen, No. 05-14-00389-CV 

(Tex. App.—Dallas July 23, 2014) (order dismissing bill of review). Id. The Court dismissed 

relator’s request for relief on the ground the Court’s plenary power had expired. Id. The Court 

neither modified its judgment, vacated its judgment and rendered a new judgment, nor issued a 

different opinion in conjunction with its dismissal of the petition for bill of review. Accordingly, 

relator is not now entitled to file a further motion for rehearing, TEX. R. APP. P. 49.5, and in any 

event, the Court’s plenary power over its April 17, 2014 judgment has expired. TEX. R. APP. P.

19.1 (court of appeal’s plenary power expires 60 days after judgment if no timely filed motion 

for rehearing, en banc reconsideration, or motion to extend time to file such a motion is 

pending); TEX. R. APP. P. 52.9 (motions for rehearing must be filed within 15 days after order 

disposing of original proceeding). We DENY relator’s motion for rehearing.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED August 20, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-51307 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BENJAMIN CALVILLO-PONCE, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-02-CR-428-1-FB

-------------------- Before JONES, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Benjamin Calvillo-Ponce appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Calvillo-Ponce contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) define separate offenses. He argues that the prior conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should have been alleged in his indictment. Calvillo-Ponce maintains that heNo. 02-51307 -2- pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for that offense.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Calvillo-Ponce acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER and PRINCIPAL
       FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
          OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of the Everest Fund, L.P.
(the "Partnership"), for the quarter ended June 30, 2012,
as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Peter Lamoureux, President
of Everest Asset Management, Inc., the general partner of
the Everest Fund, L.P. (the "Fund"), 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 the Fund.




      By:  /s/ Peter Lamoureux
         ----------------------
      Name: 	Peter Lamoureux
      Title: 	Director, President and
      		Treasurer

      July 14, 2012


		E-3
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Wells Real Estate Fund III, L.P. for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), the undersigned,
Leo F. Wells, III, Principal Executive Officer of the corporate General Partner of the Registrant, and Douglas P. Williams, Principal Financial Officer of the corporate General Partner of the Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:



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



|                           
|---------------------------
|/s/ Leo F. Wells, III      
|Leo F. Wells, III          
|Principal Executive Officer
|November 8, 2007           



|                           
|---------------------------
|/s/ Douglas P. Williams    
|Douglas P. Williams        
|Principal Financial Officer
|November 8, 2007
August 28, 2012



### JUDGMENT


## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

KIMBERLY MITCHELL , Appellant

NO. 14

- 12

- 00562

- CV V.

SOCIAL SECURITY DEPA RTMENT, MS. BARRIOS, KERRIE MOONEY, and AISHA SEWELL, Appellee s

__________________________ ______ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the order signed by the court below on February 9, 2012. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

.

We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appeal be paid by appellant, Kimberly Mitchell.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
V

LAW OFFICES OF

RYAN G. ANDERSON

apmfessiondhmiiaJ hcbihly corjxmiion

Ryan Anderson

ryan@rgalawpc.com • ft<

Board Certihed in Civil Appellate Law r -^

ZE»» 1ZTO

3cr _ o

rv>

TexasBoard of Legal Specialization -: f\» co -.p-

—

January 20, 2015

Mr. William R. Sudela Viafacsimile: (713) 739-8403

Crady, Jewett & McCulley, LLP

2727 Allen Parkway, Suite 1700

Houston, TX 77019-2125

Mr. John W. Petry Via Facsimile: (210) 735-6889

Langley & Banack, Inc.

Trinity Plaza II, Ninth Floor

745 East Mulberry

San Antonio, TX 78212-3166

Mr. Dale Weyand Via Regular Mail

Dale Weyand, P.C.

6714 N. New Braunfels, Suite 104

San Antonio. TX 78209

Re: Cause No. 13-09-12098-DCV; Professional Directional Enterprises,

Inc., et al. v. Gambit Resources, Inc.f/k/a Gulfmark Resources, Inc.

a/k/a Gambit Energy, et al v. Robert W. Eardley, et al; in the 293rd

Judicial District Court, Dimmit County, Texas

No. 04-15-00016-CV; Robert W. Eardley, et al, v. Gambit Resources,

et al.; in the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas at San

Antonio

Dear Counsel:

Please accept this notification that I will be on vacation from March 9, 2015 through

March 13, 2015 and from June 8, 2015 through June 12, 2015. I request as a matter of

professional courtesy that you avoid scheduling any matters in the above-referenced case on

these dates.

Milam Building 115 E. Travis Street • Suite 1403

San Antonio. Texas 78205

Main: 210.399.0198

Fax: 210.855.5050
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF 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, James W. Bernau, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly
Report of Willamette Valley Vineyards Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ended June 30, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such 10-QSB fairly presents in all material respects the
financial condition and results of operations of Willamette Valley Vineyards
Inc.

Date: Aug 14, 2006
By:	 /s/ James W. Bernau
Name: James W. Bernau
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
Motion Granted, Appeal Reinstated, Appeal Dismissed , and Memorandum

Opinion filed March 26 , 202 4

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 2 2

- 00 780

- CV

ARPAN GUPTA , Appellant

V.

MONICA PATEL , Appelle e

On Appeal from the 3 34 th District Court

Harris County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2017

- 54171

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This appeal is from a judgment signed July 25, 2022

. On March 1 9 , 202 4
, appellant filed a n unopposed motion to dismiss th is appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a). The motion is granted.

We reinstate and dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hassan, Poissant, and Wilson.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T S AR YA NA J UN I WAT Y, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 70475 A ge nc yN o. A 099- 403- 111 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d Jul y17, 2012 ** B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , T H O M A S , an dS IL V E R M A N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. S a ry a naJuni w a ty , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of I ndone s i a , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s orderdi sm i ss i ng her app ea l fr om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s de c i s i on de ny i ng he rappl i c a t i on f ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd r e l i e f

unde rthe C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e ( “ C A T ” ) . W e ha ve 

# FI LED JU L 24 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 70475 2 j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f ors ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e the ag en cy’ s factu al fi n d i n g s, ap p l yi n g th e n ew st an d ard s g o v ern i n g ad v erse c r e d ib ilityd e te rm in a tio n s c r e a te db yth e R e a l I D A c t. Sh restha v. H older , 590 F . 3 d1 0 3 4 , 1 0 3 9 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 1 0 ) . We d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. U nde rthe t ot a l i tyof

the c i r c um s t a nc e s , s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the agency ’ s a dv er se cr edi bi l i ty det erm i nat i on base d o n the di sc re panci es betw ee n Juni w a ty ’ s de c l a r a t i on, t e s t i m ony , a nd he rs upport i ng doc um e nt a t i on r e ga r di ng the c h r o n o lo g yo f

h a rm s s h e c la im s to h a v e s u f f e r e din I n d o n e s ia . Se e Shr es tha , 590 F . 3d a t1046- 47. A c c or di ngl y , w e de nythe pe t i t i on a s t o Juni w a ty ’ s a s y l um a nd w ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l c la im s . Se e Fa r a h v . A s h c r o ft , 3 4 8 F .3 d1 1 5 3 , 1 1 5 6 ( 9 th C i r. 20 03 ). B ec ause Juni w aty’ s C A T cl ai m i s bas ed on the sam e e vi dence the agency f o u n dn o t c r e d ib le , a n ds h e p o in ts to n o o th e re v id e n c e s h o w in g it is m o r e lik e ly th a n n o t s h e w ill b e to rtu r e dif r e tu rn e dto I n d o n e s ia , h e rC A T c la im a ls o f a ils . See i d. a t 1 1 5 6 - 5 7 . F i na l l y , w e r e

j e c tJuni w a ty ’ s c ont e nt i on tha tthe a ge nc yvi ol a t e d he rdue p r o c e s s r ig h ts b yn o t r e a c h in g th e m e r its o f h e rc la im . Se e La ta v . I NS , 204 F . 3d10- 70475 3 1241, 1246 ( 9th C i r . 2000) ( r e qui r i ng e rr ora nd pr e j udi c e t o pr e va i l on adue proces s c l ai m ). P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 9
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          42,478
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     83,807
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          13,256
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            13,284
<LOANS>                                        638,775
<ALLOWANCE>                                      9,254
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 810,475
<DEPOSITS>                                     690,589
<SHORT-TERM>                                    15,900
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             12,935
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        25,050
<OTHER-SE>                                      66,001
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 810,475
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 44,439
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,986
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                49,425
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              19,082
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,288
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           30,137
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,259
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  59
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 25,898
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,025
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       7,636
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,636
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.29
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.63
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,911
<LOANS-PAST>                                     1,427
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 1,134
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,388
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      623
<RECOVERIES>                                       230
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                9,254
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        


</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

AARON TREVINO,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-23-00111-CR

Appeal from the

187th Judicial District Court

of Bexar County, Texas

(TC# 2021CR7554)

J U D G M E N T

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

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

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2024.

JEFF ALLEY, Chief Justice

Before Alley, C.J., Palafox and Soto, JJ.
# Mestek, Inc.

260 North Elm StreetWestfield,
Massachusetts 01085

# CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER

# 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 Annual Report of Mestek, Inc. (the Corporation) on Form
10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen M. Shea, Chief Financial
Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

| | (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 Corporation.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date: April __, 2004 | By:                            
|-------------------- | -------------------------------
|                     | Name:  Stephen M. Shea         
|                     | Title:  Chief Financial Officer
Opinion issued Dec ember 4 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals

For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 18

- 00570

- CV

——————————— IN RE JOE BRAYBOY, I II , Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator Joe Brayboy III filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking

release from his alleged illegal confinement in the Harris County Jail. 1

The petition is denied. Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

1 The underlying case is In the Interest of J.E.B., a Child , cause number 2004

- 66585, pending in the 311th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Hon orable Alicia Franklin presiding.2 PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Massengale , and Brown

.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

BEATRIZ CHALMETA a/k/a BEATRIZ ELENA CHALMETA and

JULIO CHALMETA,

Appellants,

v.

WACHOVIA MORTGAGE, F.S.B. f/k/a WORLD SAVINGS BANK, F.S.B.,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-3493

[January 15, 2020]

Appeal of nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth 

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Barry Stone, Senior Judge; L.T. Case 

No. CACE 09-063847.

Beatriz Chalmeta a/k/a Beatriz Elena Chalmeta and Julio Chalmeta, 

Weston, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Fla. R. App. P. 9.315(a).

GROSS, GERBER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.