alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gustavo Vinent, Appellant.

[975 NYS2d 403]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.), rendered February 10, 2011, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of eight years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly declined to charge petit larceny as a lesser included offense since there was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, that he stole merchandise, but did not use force to retain it. Nothing in the People’s case supported such a theory (see *People v Negron,*91 NY2d 788 [1998]), and under the version of the incident presented in his own testimony, defendant did not commit any larceny at all, but was instead attempting to buy the merchandise (see *People v Ruiz,*216 AD2d 63 [1995], *affd*87 NY2d 1027 [1996]). There was no rational basis for the jury to find that defendant stole the merchandise, but changed his mind and used force only to “return” it.

Defendant’s legal sufficiency claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. We also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). The evidence established the element of physical injury *(see e.g. People v Wise,*99 AD3d 584, 585 [1st Dept 2012], *lv denied*21 NY3d 1011 [2013]). In this regard, we find no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations with respect to the testimony of the victim and an eyewitness. The evidence supports the conclusion that the victim’s injuries were more than mere “petty slaps, shoves, kicks and the like” *(Matter of Philip A.,*49 NY2d 198, 200 [1980]), and that they caused “more than slight or trivial pain” *(People v Chiddick,*8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]; *see also People v Guidice,*83 NY2d 630, 636 [1994]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-85,574]

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (“Act”), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on November 12, 2014, applicable to workers of Verso Paper Corporation, Bucksport Mill Division, including workers whose unemployment insurance (UI) wages are reported through Verso Paper, LLC, Bucksport, Maine.

At the request of a state workforce official, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged in activities related to the production of coated, uncoated mechanical and specialty paper.

The company reports that workers leased from Imerys and Elite Staffing were on-site at the Bucksport, Maine location of Verso Paper Corporation. The Department has determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of the subject firm to be considered leased workers.

Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include workers leased from Imerys and Elite Staffing working on-site at the Bucksport, Maine location of Verso Paper Corporation, Bucksport Mill Division.

The amended notice applicable to TA-W-85,574 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Imerys and Elite Staffing, reporting to Verso Paper Corporation, Bucksport Mill Division, including workers whose unemployment insurance (UI) wages are reported through Verso Paper, LLC, Bucksport, Maine, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after January 7, 2014 through November 12, 2016, and all workers in the group threatened with total or partial separation from employment on the date of certification through two years from the date of certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

Signed in Washington, DC, this 16th day of December, 2014.

Michael W. Jaffe,

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2014-30507 Filed 12-29-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000

       

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                              22,893
<SECURITIES>                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                       159,247
<ALLOWANCES>                        3,472
<INVENTORY>                         138,482
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    322,351
<PP&E>                              298,828
<DEPRECIATION>                      180,128
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      533,855
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               101,916
<BONDS>                             45,879
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0
<PREFERRED>                         0
<COMMON>                            457
<OTHER-SE>                          373,167
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        533,855
<SALES>                             170,474
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    170,474
<CGS>                               102,037
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       102,037
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    39,969
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    146
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  1,277
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     27,438
<INCOME-TAX>                        9,868
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 17,570
<DISCONTINUED>                      659
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0
<CHANGES>                           0
<NET-INCOME>                        16,911
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                       0.19
<FN>
This financial data schedule has been restated in accordance with SFAS No. 128
(Earnings Per Share), and also to reflect the disposal of the company's network
products business.
</FN>


        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael McNeal, Appellant.

[974 NYS2d 276]

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), rendered May 5, 2010, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s claim that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit, as he did not demon*653strate that there was *no*strategic or legitimate explanation for defense counsel’s allegedly deficient conduct or that defense counsel otherwise failed to provide meaningful representation *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 712 [1998]; *People v Rivera,*71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]; *People v Landri,*104 AD3d 791, 792 [2013]). Rather, the record, viewed in totality, demonstrates that the defendant was afforded the effective assistance of counsel *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d at 712; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d at 147; *People v Landri,*104 AD3d at 792). Rivera, J.E, Balkin, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.
#### Elroy CHESTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Rick THALER, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 08-70023.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 30, 2011.

Susan Carol Orlansky (argued), (Court-Appointed), Jeffrey Marc Feldman, Feldman, Orlansky & Sanders, Anchorage, AK, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Matthew Dennis Ottoway, Asst. Atty. Gen., Postconviction Lit. Div., Austin, TX, for Respondent-Appellee.

*

 DENNIS, J., dissents from the denial of panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, for the reasons stated in his dissenting opinion.

*ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC*

(Opinion Dec. 30, 2011, 5th Cir., 666 F.3d 340)

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and STEWART and DENNIS,* Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Petition for Rehearing is DENIED and no member of this panel nor judge in regular active service on the court having requested that the court be polled on Rehearing En Banc, (Fed. R.App. P. and 5th Cir. R. 35) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is also DENIED.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-18-00496-CV

John Wardell and Lois Wardell

v.

Henry Gearhart, Jylaine Gearhart and Orion Gearhart

On appeal from the

206th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. C-6014-13-D

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed with prejudice. The Court orders the 

appeal DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the 

appeal are taxed against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

December 6, 2018
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Adam SCHMIDT, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-11237

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Oct. 25, 2006.

Denise B. Williams, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Helen Miller Liggett, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Lubbock, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Adam Schmidt has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Schmidt has not responded to counsel’s motion. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief shows that there are no nonfrivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, *603and this appeal is DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
PROVIDENT FINANCIALGROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES 

EXHIBIT 32.2 

CERTIFICATION OFPRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350 

In connection with the filing withthe Securities and Exchange Commission of the Quarterly Report of Provident FinancialGroup, Inc. (“Provident”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 (the“Report”), I, Christopher J. Carey, Chief Financial Officer (Principal FinancialOfficer) of Provident, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 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 results of operations of Provident. 

/s/ Christopher J. Carey
**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**

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Chemtura Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ending December 31, 2007 (the “Report”), I, Robert L. Wood,Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

(1)                                  The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 

 
| /S/  ROBERT L. WOOD |   |
|---------------------|--------|

RobertL. Wood

Chairman,President and

ChiefExecutive Officer

Date:  March17, 2008

 

Thiswritten statement accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

 

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. 50-255-LA; ASLBP No. 15-936-03-LA-BD01]

                    Pursuant to delegation by the Commission,                     *see*37 FR 28,710 (Dec. 29, 1972), and the Commission's regulations,                     *see, e.g.,*10 CFR 2.104, 2.105, 2.300, 2.309, 2.313, 2.318, 2.321, notice is hereby given that an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) is being established to preside over the following proceeding: Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Palisades Nuclear Plant).                

                    This proceeding involves an application by Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy) for a license amendment for Palisades Nuclear Plant, located in Van Buren County, Michigan. In response to a notice filed in the                     **Federal Register**                    ,                     *see*79 FR 58,812 (Sept. 30, 2014), a Petition to Intervene was filed on December 1, 2014 by Beyond Nuclear, Don't Waste Michigan, Michigan Safe Energy Future—Shoreline Chapter, and the Nuclear Energy Information Service.                

The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges:

Ronald M. Spritzer, Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

Dr. Gary S. Arnold, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

Dr. Thomas J. Hirons, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

                    All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule.                     *See*10 CFR 2.302.                

Rockville, Maryland.

Dated: December 17, 2014.

E. Roy Hawkens,

Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel.

[FR Doc. 2014-30060 Filed 12-22-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Sheri Lue Willhite, Appellant

No. 06-18-00157-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 6th District Court of Lamar 

County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 27740). Opinion 

delivered by Justice Burgess, Chief Justice 

Morriss and Justice Moseley* participating. 

*Justice Moseley, Retired, Sitting by 

Assignment.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the judgment 

of the court below. Therefore, we modify the judgment by (1) changing the “Degree of Offense” 

to a state jail felony and by (2) changing the enhancing statute from Section 12.42 to Section 

12.425 and (3) deleting court costs of $349.00 to eliminate duplicative costs. As modified, the 

judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

We note that the appellant, Sheri Lue Willhite, has adequately indicated her inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED FEBRUARY 22, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

WALTER JULIOUS 

PORTERFIELD, 

) 

) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) 

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION 16-00018-CG-M 

) 

GROVER SMITH, et al., ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

ORDER 

 After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo 

determination of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, 

the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) 

is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. 

It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED without 

prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

 DONE and ORDERED this 8th day of September, 2016. 

 /s/ Callie V. S. Granade 

 SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:16-cv-00018-CG-M Document 40 Filed 09/08/16 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED INCOME AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,312,797
<SECURITIES>                                   100,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,576,081
<ALLOWANCES>                                   103,000
<INVENTORY>                                  4,460,361
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,289,925
<PP&E>                                      15,035,374
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,591,401
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,698,624
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,763,955
<BONDS>                                        782,520
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       479,111
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,818,838
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,698,624
<SALES>                                      4,366,544
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,366,544
<CGS>                                        2,154,886
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,821,330
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               849,769
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (11,041)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,432
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (288,502)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (131,600)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (156,902)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (156,902)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.1****Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements, Form S-8 No.333-101121 pertaining to the Pactiv Corporation 2002 Incentive Compensation Plan, Form S-8 No.333-33484, pertaining to the Pactiv Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and Form S-8 No.333-90333, pertaining to Tenneco Packaging Inc. Thrift Plan for Hourly Employees of TennecoPackaging and Tenneco Packaging Thrift Plan, of our reports datedFebruary 27, 2008, with respectto the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Pactiv Corporation, and the effectivenessof internal control over financial reporting of Pactiv Corporation, included in the Annual Report(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2007.Chicago, Illinois
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2062 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Business Systems Modernization for fiscal 

year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service, Business Systems Modernization for fiscal year 2024. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, INTERNAL REV5 ENUE SERVICE, BUSINESS SYSTEMS MOD6 ERNIZATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue ServVerDate Sep 11 2014 02:49 Apr 18, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2062.IH H2062

rfrederick on DSKB3L4F33PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2062 IH

1 ice, Business Systems Modernization for fiscal year 2024 

2 may not exceed $150,000,000. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKB3L4F33PROD with BILLS