alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2232 

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

of Agriculture, Processing Research, and Marketing, Office of the Secretary 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 Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US 

Department of Agriculture, Processing Research, and 

Marketing, Office of the Secretary 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, PROC5 ESSING RESEARCH, AND MARKETING, OFFICE 

6 OF THE SECRETARY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for US Department of Agriculture, Processing ReVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:53 Apr 19, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2232.IH H2232

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2232 IH

1 search, and Marketing, Office of the Secretary for fiscal 

2 year 2024 may not exceed $46,603,000. 

Æ 


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

[972 NYS2d 547]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J., at request for new counsel; Patricia M. Nunez, J., at jury trial and sentencing), rendered April 26, 2012, as amended April 30, 2012, convicting defendant of robbery in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 3 Vs to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The element of forcible taking was established by evidence that defendant overpowered the elderly victim, held him down on a couch, and held his hand over the victim’s mouth, and that defendant thereby compelled the victim to give up his money.

Since there was no request to charge petit larceny as a lesser included offense, “the court’s failure to submit such offense does not constitute error” (CPL 300.50 [2]). In any event, there was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, that he took the victim’s money without permission, but nevertheless did so without using force *(see e.g. People v Tucker,*41 AD3d 210 [1st Dept 2007], *lv denied*9 NY3d 882 [2007], *cert denied*552 US 1153 [2008]). Similarly, counsel’s failure to request this charge did not deprive defendant of effective assistance under the state and federal standards *(see People v Benevento,*91 NY2d 708, 713-714 [1998]; *Strickland v Washington,*466 US 668 [1984]). Regardless of whether counsel should have made the request, defendant has not shown a reasonable probability that the charge would have been granted or that, if granted, it would have affected the outcome.

The calendar court properly exercised its discretion when it denied defendant’s request for appointment of new counsel. Contrary to defendant’s contention, the record reflects that the court provided defendant an adequate opportunity to state his reasons for substitution *(compare People v Hansen,*37 AD3d *516318 [1st Dept 2007], *with People v Bryan,*31 AJD3d 295 [2006]). The court asked defendant what he wished to say, considered defendant’s stated reasons for requesting new counsel, and correctly rejected them.

Defendant did not preserve his claim that he was deprived of a fair trial by the trial court’s questioning of the victim, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that the court acted reasonably when it asked a few clarifying questions *(see People v Moulton,*43 NY2d 944 [1978]), and that it did not take on “either the function or appearance of an advocate” *(People v Arnold,*98 NY2d 63, 67 [2002]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Clark, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Lumies Huff, Appellant, v Sheryl T. Smikle, Respondent.

[973 NYS2d 576]

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, in which the father alleged that mother violated an order of protection, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Sammarco, J.), dated August 10, 2012, which, after a hearing, inter alia, dismissed the violation petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The violation petition was properly dismissed based upon the *997father’s failure to prove that the mother was served with the order of protection, which was entered upon her failure to appear, or was aware of the terms of that order prior to the alleged violation *(see Matter of Rivera v Quinones-Rivera,*15 AD3d 583, 584 [2005]).

The father’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Sgroi, Cohen and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.
// Microsoft Visual C++ generated resource script.
//
#include "resource.h"

#define APSTUDIO_READONLY_SYMBOLS

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
#undef APSTUDIO_READONLY_SYMBOLS

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// English (U.S.) resources


/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
// Icon
//

// Icon placed first or with lowest ID value becomes application icon

LANGUAGE 9, 1
#pragma code_page(1252)
1           ICON         "app.ico"

#ifdef APSTUDIO_INVOKED
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
// TEXTINCLUDE
//

1 TEXTINCLUDE  
BEGIN
    "resource.h\0"
    "\0"
END

2 TEXTINCLUDE  
BEGIN
    "#include ""afxres.h""\r\n"
    "\0"
END

3 TEXTINCLUDE  
BEGIN
    "\0"
END

#endif    // APSTUDIO_INVOKED

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



#ifndef APSTUDIO_INVOKED
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
//
// Generated from the TEXTINCLUDE 3 resource.
//


/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
#endif    // not APSTUDIO_INVOKED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
         THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
         FIRST QUARTER 1999 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
         ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
                        
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. Dollars            
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1999          
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1999    
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1999    
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1    
<CASH>                                 2,020   
<SECURITIES>                               0    
<RECEIVABLES>                         19,930   
<ALLOWANCES>                               0   
<INVENTORY>                            8,296   
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      35,341   
<PP&E>                                 4,938   
<DEPRECIATION>                             0   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        40,940   
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  6,198   
<BONDS>                                    0   
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0   
<PREFERRED>                                0   
<COMMON>                             (28,466)   
<OTHER-SE>                            63,208          
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          40,940   
<SALES>                               17,281   
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      17,281   
<CGS>                                  4,357   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                          4,357   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       8,793   
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         741   
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0   
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        4,141   
<INCOME-TAX>                           1,574   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    2,567   
<DISCONTINUED>                             0   
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0   
<CHANGES>                                  0   
<NET-INCOME>                           2,567   
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            .41   
<EPS-DILUTED>                            .40   
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32** **CERTIFICATION****PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF    THE****SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF    2002**     Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350,    chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of    the undersigned officers of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia,    Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does    hereby certify that:     The Annual Report on    Form 10-K    for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the    “Form 10-K”)    of the Company fully complies with the requirements of    section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of    1934 and the information contained in the    Form 10-K    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial    condition and results of operations of the Company. *Dated: March 17,    2008                                          /s/    Susan Lyne**-----------------------------------**Susan Lyne**President and Chief Executive    Officer* *Dated: March 17,    2008                                          /s/    Howard Hochhauser**-----------------------------------**Howard Hochhauser**Chief Financial    Officer*
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Russell Walker, Appellant.

[824 NYS2d 740]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County *637(Katz, J.), rendered August 24, 2004, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s challenges to the prosecutor’s summation comments are unpreserved for appellate review *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Balls,*69 NY2d 641 [1986]; *People v Nieves, 2*AD3d 539 [2003]) and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Goldstein, J.E, Spolzino, Skelos and Covello, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2364 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2364

    To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Global 
      Agriculture and Food Security Program 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 Global 
      Agriculture and Food Security Program for fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR GLOBAL AGRICULTURE 
              AND FOOD SECURITY PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Global Agriculture and 
Food Security Program for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $0.
                                 <all>
```
**CERTIFICATION
                                                           Exhibit
      31.2**




I,
      Charles L. Nuzum, certify that:




1.
        I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of SVC Financial
      Services, Inc.;




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 year 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 years presented in this report;




4.
        The registrant's other certifying officer and I are 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 we
      have:




(a)
      Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
      material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
      during the year in which this report is being prepared;




(b)
      Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
      of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the year 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 most recent fiscal
      quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
      affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
      and




5.
        The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,
      based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
      reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's
      board of directors;




(a)
      All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of internal controls 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 controls over financial
      reporting.





Date:
       January 12, 2006




/s/
      Charles L. Nuzum


_________________


Charles
      L. Nuzum


Chief
      Financial Officer
The State of TexasAppellee



# Fourth Court of Appeals
**San Antonio, Texas**

October 17, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00555

- CR

Robert MARTINEZ

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 5, Be xar County, Texas Trial Court No. 307125 Honorable Jason Pulliam, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On December 19, 2013, appellant Robert Martinez filed an application for writ of habeas corpus in County Court at Law No. 5 in Bexar County, Texas. See T EX

. C ODE C RIM

. P ROC

. A NN

. art. 11.07 2 (West Supp. 2014).

On February 4, 2014, the trial court heard arguments on Martinez’s application . The trial

court determined, and advised Martinez , that he was not being held by any order from County Court at Law No. 5, but he could seek habeas corpus relief in a court of pro per jurisdiction. The trial court documented its action in its criminal docket sheet, but it did not issue any order.

M artinez filed a notice of appeal on August 4, 2014. The clerk’s and reporter’s records
have been filed in this court.

On September 9, 2014, we advised Martinez that the clerk’s record did not appear to
contain an appealable order or judgment. We order ed him to show cause in writing by September 29, 2014, why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

On September 3 0, 2014, the trial court signed findings of fact and conclusions of law , and it denied the relief Martinez sought. The trial court ’s findings and conclusions were filed in this court on October 2, 2014.

The trial court’s September 30, 2014 order is an a ppealable order

. See id. Martinez’s notice of appeal w as timely filed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 27.1(b) (prematurely filed notice). Our September 9, 2014 show cause order is satisfied.Appellant’s brief is due THIRTY DAYS from the date of this order.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 17th day of October, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MANDEEP SINGH, Petitioner,
v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. No. 11-70797 Agency No. A097-114-862
MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted June 9, 2014 San Francisco, California Before: SCHROEDER, GRABER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Petitioner Mandeep Singh, a native and c itizen of India, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition. 

# FILED
JUN 19 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Singh could safely and reasonably relocate within India. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1208.13(b)(1), 1208.16(b)(1). The country reports indicate that the Punjabi police would not pursue a non-militant, rank-and-file AISSF member like Singh outside the Punjab region, and that the national authorities would have no interest in someone with Singh’s background. Sikhs may practice their religion without restriction in every state, and there are substantial Sikh communities throughout India where Singh and his family could reside. Because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination regarding relocation, substantial evidence also suppor ts the BIA’s denial of CAT relief. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(3)(ii), (iv). PETITION DENIED
.

2
#### In re: Phillip A. TALLEY, Debtor. Phillip A. Talley, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alabama Department of Public Safety, W.M. Coppage, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 07-11478

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Dec. 19, 2007.

Leroy Alan Cobb, Anniston, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Before BLACK, CARNES and BARKETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Phillip A. Talley appeals the district court’s grant of the motion to dismiss his complaint he filed against Defendants Alabama Department of Public Safety and W.M. Coppage. Talley filed a bankruptcy adversary proceeding against the Defendants after they suspended his driver’s license because of his nonpayment of traffic tickets. Talley alleges the Defendants violated his bankruptcy stay by suspending his license after his bankruptcy petition was filed. The bankruptcy court concluded the traffic fine was a continuation of criminal proceedings permitted by 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(1). The district court affirmed. After review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm for the reasons stated in the district court’s well-reasoned opinion of January 29, 2007.

AFFIRMED.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2129 

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

National Archives and Records Administration, Office of Inspector General 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 Independent Agencies, National Archives and Records Administration, Office of Inspector General 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, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2129 IH

1 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

2 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES, NATIONAL AR3 CHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION, OF4 FICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR FISCAL 

5 YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Independent Agencies, National Archives and 

9 Records Administration, Office of Inspector General for 

10 fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $4,823,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Exhibit 31.1**Certifications**I, J. Collier Sparks, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-QSB of MDI, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared; b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Dated: August 15, 2005         By/s/J. Collier Sparks    J. Collier Sparks    Chief Executive Officer