alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE> 1
                                 EXHIBIT 23-1
                                 ------------

<PAGE> 2

                        INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
Mercantile Bancorporation Inc.:

Plan Administrator
Mercantile Bancorporation Inc.
    Horizon Investment and Savings Plan and Trust:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(No. 33-35139) on Form S-8 of Mercantile Bancorporation Inc. related to the
Mercantile Bancorporation Inc. Horizon Investment and Savings Plan and Trust
of our report dated June 26, 1998, relating to the statements of net assets
available for plan benefits of the Mercantile Bancorporation Inc. Horizon
Investment and Savings Plan and Trust as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and
the related statements of changes in net assets available for plan benefits
for the years then ended and the related schedules, which report appears in
the 1997 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A, of Mercantile Bancorporation Inc.


                                   /s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP


St. Louis, Missouri
June 26, 1998
OAO 247 (02/08) Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

Southern District ofAlabama

United States of America )

)

)

)

)

)

v.

RALPH LAHQUAN STATEN Case No: 05-254-001

USM No: 09192-003

Date of Previous Judgment: 11/14/2006 Carlos Williams

(Use Date of Last Amended Judgment if Applicable) Defendant’s Attorney

Order Regarding Motion for Sentence Reduction Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

Upon motion of Y the defendant ’ the Director of the Bureau of Prisons ’ the court under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) for a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed based on a guideline sentencing range that has

subsequently been lowered and made retroactive by the United States Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 994(u), and having considered such motion,

IT IS ORDERED that the motion is:

’ DENIED. Y GRANTED and the defendant’s previously imposed sentence of imprisonment (as reflected in 

the last judgment issued) of 121 months is reduced to 97 months .

I. COURT DETERMINATION OF GUIDELINE RANGE (Prior to Any Departures)

Previous Offense Level: 31 Amended Offense Level: 29

Criminal History Category: II Criminal History Category: II

Previous Guideline Range: 121 to 151 months Amended Guideline Range: 97 to

121

months

II. SENTENCE RELATIVE TO AMENDED GUIDELINE RANGE

Y The reduced sentence is within the amended guideline range.

’ The previous term of imprisonment imposed was less than the guideline range applicable to the defendant at the time 

of sentencing as a result of a departure or Rule 35 reduction, and the reduced sentence is comparably less than the

amended guideline range.

’ Other (explain):

III. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

Except as provided above, all provisions of the judgment dated 11/15/2006 shall remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Order Date: June 8, 2010 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade

Judge’s signature

Effective Date: UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

(if different from order date) Printed name and title

Case 1:05-cr-00254-CG-D Document 43 Filed 06/08/10 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                      SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,
                                 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                           SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer of Microvision, Inc. (the "Company"), does hereby certify that to the undersigned's knowledge:

1)  the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 fully complies with the requirements and
   of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2)   the information contained in the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

| |  | /s/JEFF T. WILSON
    Jeff T. Wilson.
    Chief Financial Officer
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 10, 2010

---
## St at e of Ne w York Supre me Court , Appe llat e D i vi s i on T h i rd J udi cial D e

part me n t Decided and Entered: February 2, 2017 5 23052

________________________________ In the Matter of JASPER MITCHELL, Petitioner, v MEMORANDUM AND JUDGMENT
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION, Respondent.

________________________________ Calendar Date: November 29, 2016 Before: Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Rose and Mulvey, JJ.

__________ Jasper Mitchell, Coxsackie, petitioner pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Marcus J. Mastracco of counsel), for respondent.

__________ Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Corrections and Community Supervision finding petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule. A search of petitioner's cell disclosed, on top of his cell locker, a partially smoked, rolled cigarette containing a green leafy substance that smelled like and tested positive for marihuana. Petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with drug possession. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty of the charge and the determination was upheld on administrative appeal with a reduced penalty. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.-2- 523052

We confirm. The misbehavior report, positive tests result and related documentation provide substantial evidence to support the determination of guilt (see Matter of McMaster v Annucci, 138 AD3d 1289, 1289 [2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 902 [2016]; Matter of Starling v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision, 123 AD3d 1195, 1196 [2014]). Contrary to his claim, a reasonable inference of possession arose by virtue of petitioner's control over the locker area of his cell (see Matter of Hill v Venettozzi, 144 AD3d 1295, 1296 [2016]; Matter of Perkins v Annucci, 129 AD3d 1421, 1421-1422 [2015]). Petitioner's denial that marihuana was found in his cell or that he possessed it created a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve (see Matter of Bartello v Annucci, 142 AD3d 1194, 1194 [2016]). To the extent that petitioner argues that he was denied the right to view or inspect the substance in question, the Hearing Officer explained that the small quantity of marihuana found was used up in the testing process and, thus, he was not improperly denied access to it (see Matter of Morgan v Goord, 10 AD3d 792, 793 [2004]). Petitioner's remaining challenges, including those regarding the search of his cell and the testing procedures, were not raised at the hearing and, accordingly, they are unpreserved for our review and may not be considered (see Matter of Khan v New York State Dept. of Health, 96 NY2d 879, 880 [2001]; Matter of Redmon v Smith, 141 AD3d 1071, 1071 [2016]). Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Rose and Mulvey, JJ., concur.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

ENTER:

Robert D. Mayberger Clerk of the Court
Description

Problem

There is a need for a pulse quantizer that uses 

arrays of one or more Josephson junctions to 

create a pulse voltage output that is immune to 

differential pulse timing shifts. 

Invention

We have invented a pulse quantizer that uses

arrays of one or more Josephson junctions to 

create a pulse voltage output that is immune to 

differential pulse timing shifts. When the output 

pulse patterns are used to encode a waveform, for 

example, the waveform will be free from pulse 

timing shifts that degrade the accuracy and signal 

purity of the synthesized waveform.

Contact

Technology Partnerships Office (TPO) 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

TPO@NIST.GOV 

Benefits

Commercial Application

Quantum-accurate voltage waveform synthesis 

for ac voltage metrology and programmable 

arbitrary waveform synthesizers for RF 

applications, especially for megahertz and 

gigahertz calibration sources for LTE and 5G 

communications

Drivers for bias and controlling other circuits 

and devices, such as pulse bias control and 

characterization of qubits or data input applied 

to superconducting or other advanced 

computers (e.g., digital, quantum, reversible, or 

neuromorphic processors)

Calibration of ac voltage at frequencies up to a 

few megahertz that are currently used in ac 

voltage calibration systems and in research 

applications. There are none that are 

commercially available. This invention has the 

potential to extend the frequency range, signal 

purity and accuracy of synthesized waveforms 

to frequencies of tens or hundreds of gigahertz

Competitive Advantage

Only instrument available as a quantumaccurate voltage source that eliminates the 

differential pulse timing error in the presence of 

unknown leakage or nonzero bias currents

Superconducting Waveform Synthesizer

Patent 10,797,684

Ref. No. 18-038

superconducting waveform synthesizer
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4308 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4308

 To ensure consultation with the governments of the territories of the 
    United States with respect to trade policy and trade agreements.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 6, 2004

      Mr. Flake (for himself, Mrs. Christensen, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. 
  Faleomavaega, and Mr. Acevedo-Vila) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To ensure consultation with the governments of the territories of the 
    United States with respect to trade policy and trade agreements.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Territorial Trade Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. CONSULTATION WITH GOVERNMENTS OF U.S. TERRITORIES ON TRADE 
              POLICY AND TRADE AGREEMENTS.

    (a) Advice From Executive Departments and Other Sources.--Section 
132 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2152) is amended in the first 
sentence by inserting after ``appropriate'' the following: ``, 
including, but not limited to, the governor of any State or territory 
of the United States''.
    (b) Advice Regarding Trade in Services.--Section 306(c)(2)(A) of 
the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984 (19 U.S.C. 2114c(2)(A)) is amended--
            (1) in clause (i), by inserting ``and the governments of 
        the territories of the United States'' after ``State 
        governments'';
            (2) in clause (ii), by inserting ``and the governments of 
        the territories of the United States'' after ``local 
        governments''; and
            (3) in clause (iii), by inserting ``and the governments of 
        the territories of the United States'' after ``local 
        governments''.
                                 <all>
```
72L^Cct FM. ^Z&<TQA/6 ~D*

fiOTION DISMISSED

rseuviaovq 2.^-2^/^- DATE: O H I)^

BY: yd I

Lcimv4. ^C A-o • «, / n i RECEIVED IN tL*tt*+ ^ b,m, ived. O-pptLHU COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Pto lW<X3 G^ ,^ ^ ^toiS^ JAN 302015

Abel Acosta, Clerk

A-ppL/ c^_sv^- *_sKLs ^/l&. ^oaj./?c^s7^7'o -&AVMi5£i Q.Ai£^ 4v-
X&i TkeJl^avl- ©£-C_vmW-i\12lL ftppeJh.Ls
U^.vwls C<c^,uHy ^THxa^

J"2^M P>nftJal^L_JM/ JSo^^^^c

^/-3837g9

mr
<* ft .5g..Lrw} y

A-VC^fA /Q>nae^v/c^>7ie_A/-/—*• ->• — —• —• —* — ._ _ _» _ _ q

Fau)rfe.Qj\rt1% frrn'GLNcLrnejsj-h — — — — —3

UtSiCi ai<& .. j.2JS"-Nr. — V

Ve-VM^Mis 'ANutskd<eucevs enters grP OWnm:*\i<xL P\tcdcl£>Ajl1\-&

FvCaCL. A Av.iT,-> — — — 3

T.C-tCt l} £U-V, 6Ld^pteOr- h<4\ — 3 4

C_<se»\j e_\r P pygi fe -=, _„ ___

7&.&L&_<^C fUsti^^l-ticm ^

TaJaLe_ oC Q^jutluats- . "

n-^sffLu it^ Ro^onJ^/d&Jn •_ ~- , -> •»'u

v-oce_cLtJLV^e\i_ U-ixTtzU^ —— — — «u __. •"

^"t&^rirnQj^4 sh£: CsueLs — • i -* — . y

ft-V^u rrrCLcUrts / /Xj~fAo k^^^S —«-e» —= ——- — 2*-3 H

Pv^JLteJ; j.

nun
XUm Jhe-L- C^h4-&£ e1mW/ua.L /Q^p^aLs *>{? TaXa^

La^Ma>rdnm«ejvdbzA <Qui»Mo/\<ejz_ , Xi\i 7ke__ 337/^ DkfctcsA

7o TfM&.^xvaov-QiiL^- H<j4a^o^isoLuL C^o>--/-«

^ Olczti'oM To @.e£L&MXt'cLejc~

£>F&- ci\i'Ldi'S da^^_ /Mo.is /D^Z9o9/' io^ZSlOJ /oVZ9//, /Ml. GJviQjred.&

pLft_k oP aW Gja'i'Lfcf j

^<& i^kcj . Ue. #/mcorpovideos ~tk^'Qjc^ie_Mh e£- Ut's Hd U,s.-2£g*Zl&
. Tke_, atfevM^ (SGA/e_\r^L ^TSjcE-s- v-esp&wcL^o Af^L^dAjfe Ua_ke_*s

H4l22_s;4 JSp^^-o^^ V-eJ^offa.Ld_La,,m/ clLj^i meji AflpLt'eniu-l Ac_4

/./.oTTTt-C-A- ^LicJ_J\Tks flAi3<j_a_W£^ep6o*v/-2_^

C^Ls^y^clA-.: (L__vtiv4\ ^_ir .U*oci-_1e_\J -VAa.4- e__ J_dL ckcLpt fc4 £x32:_j_ N&i Ci&qU^K CWUclgu\A lxj&cjlLcL ke_cLaiUtW v-ejUedT cL_Q_rfc> PlppU tAAiis

•Pji-Lxiv-fe. -fe. eudkus-/ 3ie_.-h__ ven^_Lve_S . -frppL!C£mir lusts (L&MpL'eA

L-*t+tv'4kje_ C_<xnv=fcs ^WfWCLs;''

Jh -Ajtt

.ffl-ppL'cj-if\i£ iM kLs "k-_tb'e2__s' petto tvJ dLl'v<fiu__-sr ^ke_ e_sd*-£ oX'^SuOcdo-s •

"fe-Vv- _-f-J^'t_^p&ajtecL cLe.-Pei\i3-^ aexJMX^Lpre-sef?kd Stic/, p&ss/hLa.

-iAe scl>2_Io5 fe ck^TM,ye_l£. A^_pL'dzsAi-f cL'd iivj.-fecJ- L~>z±lj& ex t/a-r
7he_ pire-sacL£_^E>v--fe.L^.Hk&_jawj* f vv/o ©Lfe___kk>Ai ^ #floL r_b./u-/ v&f>-

V/ed. te v^fvU tfcfcs-/- tke_ «_jL>VcLBAi£.e_' te a s/^L^ii^fU &£rtUe_

i^siuM issliql. lAjH-kts•pLk-_xii'wg.. Tk^_v^_/W gh&al&jr~ikts,iu &_&&%

<J^2_K-c_.{>_4kbJ- Uejt-^ociCrl. m<s4*•:k__j_/eL ke*>.M (lofUWckd. /p- h/YA.

C&Y- b?oL^£.'cALlrn6:,tB-v--Va-L/-s

iaii'va.' fkhA- >nni±L£ k^^a/£t_.h__eL-CW £&v9_i\i 3/cJ^/>a Art&sf/k/q .

ChYm- eAJtcLeiuc_£_ W- (.vevr^^^ stiJ^'e-deiii^ ISAM l^t/^q

eJ^stovr- log T,r.r.Pf 4W^G_s"fi',ugi *>£ 4,V&^i*ej____ m£&W&_/_,

v." ^rke_ mfe^Ajexj G9uve^eiL.^TQxa5 a^edL iW '^pUc^lOO*

icjviiWv^eJJei? ©m Wi* li zi<r^ ( i\l&Lxj,7ke- e_,c/9 p/^/^^

2_2_.y_e /'m ^.ki. i_cL U^~7 ^-/a^+e_s £*mC|V >\Jk.L /^Ws<uj<p_v~ /^fastens
•@-V, .••• ....- s

•e*k. 1 .tvnii

ifiL fi|VoLLs__^ks' ,te^feci-&.t- M^^Zx^AtoZeus-h'c^j ^.tk^

pvr^s^cofev- Ae^ oltJrnecl tie. tadLi UncLq^ €LAt±p>zW A1/ TTfV

K€_5p££_;k-£_i/ 11{ ktJ:Ltn ift^cL

£_£> U/vi.'-k

7e>j(ae-5se_e_ C^u^uj / 7£,-7_sgg</

p\r£i JSO_» AppZi<,c_zlAi:f

fify^p frrir
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CRIMINAL NO. 08-00067-001

PAUL ANTONIO BURKE, JR.,

 Defendant

ORDER

This matter is before the court on the defendant’s motion to modify 

sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (Doc. 154). This is the defendant’s 

fourth motion for reduction of sentence due to the reduced crack cocaine 

sentencing guidelines. (See Docs. 115, 132, and 144). Each of these motions 

has been denied (Docs. 118, 133, and 145). Nothing has changed since the 

first time the court denied the reduction based on the Fair Sentencing Act of 

2012, and yet Burke persists in filing yet another motion. The court 

reiterates that a calculation of his guideline range under the amended crack 

cocaine guidelines and based on the amount of drugs attributed to him by the 

plea agreement results in a Level 29, Criminal History Category III, with a 

range of 108 to 135 months His sentence of 108 months is therefore not 

subject to reduction pursuant to § 3582(c). The motion is therefore DENIED.

DONE and ORDERED this 5th day of April, 2013.

/s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cr-00067-CG-N Document 155 Filed 04/05/13 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ZACHARY CHAPMAN, :

Petitioner, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 04-0767-WS-C

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS, :

Respondent. :

JUDGMENT

It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this action be and is hereby

DISMISSED without prejudice. 

DONE and ORDERED this 19th day of April, 2006.

 s/WILLIAM H. STEELE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-00767-WS-C Document 5 Filed 04/19/06 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:04-cv-00767-WS-C Document 5 Filed 04/19/06 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                    Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350

                  In connection with the filing with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission of BBJ Environmental Technologies, Inc.'s
(the "Company") Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30,
2003 (the "Report"), the undersigned, the Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies in my capacity as an officer of the Company, that:

         (1)      the Report fully complies with the requirements of ss.13(a) or
                  15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

                  The above certification is given as of the date of the Report
         and is limited to the periods covered by the Report.

                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this
         Certificate on August 14, 2003.






                              By: /s/ Jerry V. Schinella
                                  ---------------------------------------------
                                   Jerry V. Schinella, Chief Financial Officer




         A signed original or 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 of its staff upon
         request.
**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 2nd Quarter Report of **Bio-Lok
      International Inc.** (the
“Registrant”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended April 30, 2005, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and
      the undersigned officer certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
      such
      officer’s knowledge:




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




b)  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all  material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations  of
      the
      Registrant as of the dates and the periods expressed in the  Report.








**Bio-Lok
      International Inc.**





/s/
      Bruce
      L. Hollander


_______________________


Bruce
      L.
      Hollander


Chief
      Executive Officer


June
      15,
      2005






17
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

 SOUTHERN DIVISION 

DARRELL WILLIAMS, ) 

 ) 

Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 08-00433-KD-N 

 ) 

BENJAMIN TAYLOR, et al., ) 

 ) 

Defendants. ) 

ORDER 

After due and proper consideration of all pleadings in this file, and there having been no 

objections filed, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. 

' 636 and dated May 21, 2010, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. 

It is ORDERED that Plaintiff=s Motion to Amend (Doc. 24) is DENIED and that the 

Motion to Amend to add Jury Demand (Doc. 25) is GRANTED. 

 DONE and ORDERED this the 15th day of June 2010. 

 /s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

 KRISTI K. DuBOSE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00433-KD-N Document 28 Filed 06/15/10 Page 1 of 1
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  U NITED S TATES OF A MERICA ,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 00-4782



# 

S PENCER R EED , Defendant-Appellant. 

# 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge.

(CR-99-460) Submitted: May 31, 2001 Decided: August 6, 2001 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Andrew D. Grimes, ANDREW D. GRIMES. P.A., Summerville,South Carolina, for Appellant. Scott N. Schools, United States Attorney, Miller W. Shealy, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM:Spencer Reed appeals his conviction and 240-month sentence pursuant to his guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (West 1999). Reed’s indictment failed to state a specific drug quantity. However, Reed signed a plea agreement in which he stipulated to involvement with "not less than 50 grams" of cocaine base. Reed alsostipulated to receiving a prior conviction that would enhance his sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 851 (1994), and to a minimum incarceration period of twenty years. Reed reaffirmed these stipulations at his plea hearing. Reed was sentenced to twenty years incarceration under 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(A) (West 1999), and argues that under Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), he should have been sentenced under 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(C) (West 1999), because his indictment failed to state a drug quantity. Reed also argues the district court lacked jurisdiction to enhance his sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 851. We disagree.
Reed’s sentence does not violate Apprendi because his twenty-year incarceration period does not exceed the statutory maximum set forth in §§ 841(b)(1)(C), 846. United States v. Angle , ___ F.3d ___, No. 96-4662, 2001 WL 732124, at *2 (4th Cir. June 29, 2001) (en banc); United States v. Promise , ___ F.3d ___, No. 99-4737, 2001 WL 732389, at *5 (4th Cir. June 29, 2001) (en banc); United States v. Kinter , 235 F.3d 192, 199-200 (4th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 2001 WL 185705 (U.S. Mar. 19, 2001) (No. 00-8591); United States v. Lewis , 235 F.3d 215, 219 (4th Cir. 2000).Additionally, Reed fails to establish the district court lacked jurisdiction to enhance his sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 851. Reed stipulated to liability for a drug quantity and a prior criminal offense, mandating a twenty-year incarceration period. Reed is bound by the terms of his plea agreement. United States v. Williams , 29 F.3d 172, 174-75 (4th Cir. 1994); United States v. Wiggins , 905 F.2d 51, 53 (4th Cir. 1990); United States v. Foster , 68 F.3d 86, 89 (4th Cir. 1995). 2 U NITED S TATES v. R EEDWe dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional process.
AFFIRMED 3 U NITED S TATES v. R EED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

NATHANIEL JACKSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 512 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 2nd day of April, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.

Justice Wecht did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.