alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dwight Andrae ALLEN, a/k/a C, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-4630.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 19, 2006.

Decided: June 21, 2006.

Stephen G. Jory, Jory & Smith, L.C., Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellant. Stephen Donald Warner, Office of the United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

*224Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Dwight Andrae Allen pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute more than five grams of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000). The district court sentenced him to a mandatory minimum sentence of sixty months of imprisonment. Allen’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), challenging Allen’s sentence but stating that, in his view, there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Allen was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. We affirm.

Counsel asserts that the district court should have considered sentencing Allen using the guidelines applicable to powder cocaine because of the sentencing disparity created by the 100-to-l ratio of crack to powder cocaine. Allen’s argument is foreclosed by our decision in *United States v. Eura,*440 F.3d 625, 633-34 (4th Cir.2006) (holding that, after *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), a sentencing court cannot vary from advisory sentencing range by substituting its own crack cocaine/powder cocaine ratio for the 100-to-l ratio established by Congress). Counsel also suggests that the district court should have considered a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum sentence by applying the safety-valve provision. However, *“Booker*did nothing to alter the rule that judges cannot depart below a statutorily provided minimum sentence.... [A] district court has *no*discretion to impose a sentence outside of the statutory range established by Congress for the offense of conviction.” *United States v. Robinson,*404 F.3d 850, 862 (4th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 288, 163 L.Ed.2d 253 (2005).

In accordance with *Anders,*we have reviewed the entire record for any meritorious issues and have found none. Accordingly, we affirm Allen’s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    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

    I, William R. Slakey, certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the
fiscal year ended June 28, 2003 fully complies with the requirements in Sections
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information
contained in such Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Handspring, Inc. for the
periods being presented.

                                              /s/ WILLIAM R. SLAKEY
                                 ----------------------------------------------
                                                 William R. Slakey
                                    Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


Date: September 26, 2003
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2230 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agencies, 

US Semiquincentennial Commission 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 Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Related Agencies, US Semiquincentennial Commission 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 RELATED AGENCIES, US 

5 SEMIQUINCENTENNIAL COMMISSION FOR 

6 FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise availVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:53 Apr 19, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2230.IH H2230

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2230 IH

1 able for Related Agencies, US Semiquincentennial Com2 mission for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $8,000,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Adabu Cheeley, Appellant.

[964 NYS2d 55]

—An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered on or about March 8, 2011, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Concur— Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Renwick, Richter and Gische, JJ.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-20540

IN RE DAVID EARL GIBBS, Movant

Motion for an order authorizing the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, to consider a successive habeas 28 U.S.C. § 2254 application

August 21, 2000

Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

I

On August 15, 2000, this court issued an opinion and order
denying authorization to file a successive petition. A three-judge
panel was properly convened and participated at every juncture of

deliberations except the final issuing of the order. One member of

the panel was not available until this morning. We acted as a

quorum to afford Gibbs the maximum oppor tunity to obtain review.
Instead, Gibbs’s sole response is that the order cannot be issued
by a quorum of a panel. We disagree with that contention.

II

The third member of the panel now being available, the
previous order is re-issued.

So ordered.
#### In the Matter of Kenneth E. Williams, Appellant, v Miki M. Williams, Respondent.

[971 NYS2d 726]

— Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Onondaga County (Michael L. Hanuszczak, J.), entered May 21, 2012 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4. The order denied the objection of petitioner to an order of the Support Magistrate.

Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on August 30, 2013,

It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation. Present — Smith, J.P., Fahey, Sconiers, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
##### 



Exhibit 32
 CERTIFICATIONS OF
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    That information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ JAMES W. MACINTYRE, IVJames W. MacIntyre, IVChief Executive Officer and President  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    That information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ CLAIRE LONGClaire LongChief Financial Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KENNETH HILL, #181096, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-00179-WS-B

STATE OF ALABAMA, :

Defendant. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to 

the issue raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and 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 with prejudice, prior to 

service of process, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as frivolous.

DONE and ORDERED this 27th day of May, 2015.

s/WILLIAM H. STEELE 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00179-WS-B Document 7 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32(b)

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  FOR PPL CORPORATION'S 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2003

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PPL Corporation (the
  "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities
  and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Covered Report"), I, the principal
  financial officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that:

| | · | The Covered Report fully complies with the
        requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
        of 1934, as amended; and                   
| | - | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   |                                                                                                                                                                             
| | · | The information contained in the Covered
        Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
        and results of operations of the Company.





|Date: August 12, 2003 | /s/ John R. BiggarJohn R. Biggar
        Executive Vice President and
        Chief Financial Officer
        PPL Corporation
|--------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2276 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US Department 

of Agriculture, Rural Development Programs, Rural Housing Assistance 

Grants 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 Financial Services 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US 

Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Programs, Rural Housing Assistance Grants 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 US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, RURAL 

5 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS, RURAL HOUSING 

6 ASSISTANCE GRANTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise availVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:01 Apr 19, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2276.IH H2276

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2276 IH

1 able for US Department of Agriculture, Rural Develop2 ment Programs, Rural Housing Assistance Grants for fis3 cal year 2024 may not exceed $4,800,000. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 227 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income 

certain combat zone compensation of civilian employees of the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 9, 2023 

Mr. WITTMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

from gross income certain combat zone compensation 

of civilian employees of the United States. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Employee 

5 Combat Zone Tax Parity Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR CERTAIN 

7 COMBAT ZONE COMPENSATION OF CIVILIAN 

8 EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 112 of the Internal Rev10 enue Code of 1986 (relating to certain combat zone comVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:07 Jan 20, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H227.IH H227

kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 227 IH

1 pensation of members of the Armed Forces) is amended 

2 by adding at the end the following: 

3 ‘‘(e) CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES.— 

4 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Gross income does not in5 clude so much of the compensation as does not ex6 ceed the maximum amount specified in subsection 

7 (b) for active service as an employee of the United 

8 States for any month during any part of which such 

9 employee— 

10 ‘‘(A) served in a combat zone, or 

11 ‘‘(B) was hospitalized as a result of 

12 wounds, disease, or injury incurred while serv13 ing in a combat zone, 

14 but this paragraph shall not apply for any month be15 ginning more than 2 years after the date of the ter16 mination of combatant activities in such zone. 

17 ‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sub18 section— 

19 ‘‘(A) EMPLOYEE.—The term ‘employee’ 

20 has the meaning given such term by section 

21 2105 of title 5, United States Code. 

22 ‘‘(B) ACTIVE SERVICE.—The term ‘active 

23 service’ means active Federal service by an em24 ployee.’’. 

25 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 227 IH

1 (1) The heading for section 112 of such Code 

2 is amended to read as follows: 

3 ‘‘SEC. 112. CERTAIN COMBAT ZONE COMPENSATION OF 

4 MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES AND CI5 VILIAN EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED 

6 STATES.’’. 

7 (2) The item relating to section 112 in the table 

8 of sections for part III of subchapter B of chapter 

9 1 of such Code is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘Sec. 112. Certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces 

and civilian employees of the United States.’’. 

10 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

11 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

12 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.2
                  Certification of Principal Financial Officer

I, Philip J. Rauch, as the Chief Financial Officer of NewMarket Technology,
Inc. (the "Company"), certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of the Company;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure 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 and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

         (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

         (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's fourth
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

         (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

         (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.


Date: April 17, 2007                          /s/ Philip J. Rauch
                                              ------------------------------
                                              Exhibit 31.2
                                              Philip J. Rauch
                                              Chief Financial Officer
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

IVETTE TEJEIRO,

Appellant,

v.

TOWER MSA PARTNERS, LLC and KRISTINE WILSON,

Appellees.

No. 4D20-2742 

[January 27, 2022]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; G. Joseph Curley, Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2019-CA001023-XXXX-MB.

Chad E. Levy of the Law Offices of Levy & Levy, P.A., Sunrise, for 

appellant.

Elizabeth W. Neiberger and Ranjiv Sondhi of Bryant Miller Olive, P.A., 

Miami, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, GERBER and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
WISCONSIN 

ATCP 92.06 Inspection procedures and equipment.(1) GENERAL. Inspectors shall inspect weights and 

measures according to ch. 98, Stats., this chapter, and chs. ATCP 90 and 91.An inspection, and the 

equipment used to make it, shall comply with all of the following that apply to that type of inspection:(a) 

The national institute of standards and technology handbook 44 (specifications, tolerances, and other 

technical requirements for weighing and measuring devices), 2006 edition. 

(b) The national institute of standards and technology handbook133 (checking the net contents of packaged 

goods), 2005 edition. 

(2) PRICE VERIFICATION SYSTEMS. Inspections of price verification systems shall comply with 

section 7 “test procedures” from the chapter titled “examination procedure for price verification,” 

national institute of standards and technology handbook 130 (uniform laws and regulation in the 

areas of legal metrology and engine fuel quality), 2006 edition. 

 

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0098.pdf 

98.08 Price refunds; price information. (1) A person who uses an electronic scanner to record the 

price of a commodity or thing and who sells the commodity or thing at a price higher than the posted 

or advertised price of that commodity or thing at least shall refund to a person who purchases the 

commodity or thing the difference between the posted or advertised price of the commodity or thing 

and the price charged at the time of sale.(2) A person who sells a commodity or thing and who uses 

an electronic scanner to record the price of that commodity or thing shall display, in a conspicuous 

manner, a sign stating the requirements of sub. (1). 

 

98.26 Prohibited acts; penalty; injunction. (1) A person who does any of the following acts shall forfeit 

not less than $100 nor more than $500 for the first offense and not less than $200 nor more than $1,000 for 

a subsequent offense. A person who intentionally does any of the following acts shall be fined not more 

than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 9 months or both: 

(a) Hinders, obstructs or impersonates a sealer or inspector. (b) Uses or has in possession for use in buying 

or selling any commodity or service, or sells, any incorrect weight or measure or causes a weight or 

measure to be incorrect. 

(c) Represents in any manner a false quantity or price in connection with the purchase or sale, or any 

advertising thereof, of any commodity, thing or service. (d) Uses or disposes of any rejected weight or 

measure, or commodity, or removes there from any official tag, seal, stamp or mark, without written 

authority from a sealer or inspector. 

(e) Violates s. 98.15 (1). 

(f) Violates any other provision of this chapter or any rules promulgated under this chapter for 

which no specific penalty is prescribed.
**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**

 

Eachof the undersigned hereby certifies, in their respective capacity as an officerof California Coastal Communities, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

•                  theCompany’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof,fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

 

•                  the informationcontained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: November 8,  2005 |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|
|                          |   |
|                          |   |
| /s/ Raymond J.  Pacini        |   |
| Raymond J.  Pacini            |   |
| Chief Executive  Officer      |   |
|                          |   |
|                          |   |
| /s/ Sandra G.  Sciutto        |   |
| Sandra G.  Sciutto            |   |
| Senior Vice  President and    |   |
| Chief Financial  Officer      |   |

 

----