alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Christopher HEDGEPETH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-7463.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 31, 2006.

Decided: Nov. 2, 2006.

Christopher Hedgepeth, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United *187States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

PER CURIAM:

Christopher Hedgepeth seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hedgepeth has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
## Contact Information

Bethesda MD20892-4872

simmonss@mail.nih.gov

April 2019

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<CASH>                                            6737
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    83565
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      38955
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                134790
<PP&E>                                          730068
<DEPRECIATION>                                  440951
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  488873
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            82030
<BONDS>                                         200000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      174754
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    488873
<SALES>                                         153511
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                153511
<CGS>                                           151296
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   151296
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  5712
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4827
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (8324)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (8324)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (8324)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.22)

</TABLE>
# In the Missouri Court of Appeals

Eastern District

MARCH 15, 2016

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 84.16(b)

OR RULE 30.25(b).

1. ED102416 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V ANTAWAN T. ROSS, APP

2. ED102513 CHARLES HERVEY, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

3. ED102624 BRIAN EVANS, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

4. ED102629 BACKES & TOELKE ARGI PRODUCT RES V MIKUS FARMS APP

5. ED102722 KEVIN THOMPSON, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

6. ED102807 ALBERT KILLIAN, JR., APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

7. ED102815 JACQUELINE BARON, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

8. ED102824 JAMES MEADORS, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

9. ED102915 STATE OF MISSOURI, RES V CHAD W. JONES, APP

10. ED102934 DEVION RUSSELL, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES

1 1. ED102974 KAMECHIA MAY, APP V MEDICREDIT, INC. & DES RES

1 2. ED102987 C. FORTENBERRY, APP V BOARD OF EDUCATION, RES

1 3. ED103071 RONALD LEWIS, APP V BUILDING BUTLERS & DES RES

1 4. ED103137 DAVID ROLAND, APP V DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, RES

1 5. ED103268 PAUL STEWART, APP V STATE OF MISSOURI, RES
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 this Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report of Sterling
Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December
31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Stephen C. Raffaele, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

Dated: November 14, 2003                            /s/ Stephen C. Raffaele
                                                    -------------------------
                                                    Stephen C. Raffaele
                                                    Chief Financial Officer
                                                    Sterling Bancshares, Inc.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Martez Mandel COLEMAN, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 09-6012.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 17, 2009.

Decided: May 8, 2009.

Martez Mandel Coleman, Appellant Pro Se. Stacey Denise Haynes, Mark C. Moore, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

*287PER CURIAM:

Martez Mandel Coleman appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See United States v. Coleman,*No. 3:01-cr-00506-JFA-4 (D.S.C. Dec. 15, 2008); *see also United States v. Dunphy,*551 F.3d 247 (4th Cir.2009), petition for cert. filed (Mar. 20, 2009) (No. 08-1185). 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.*
# Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed October 18, 2023

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

________________

No. 3D23

- 0672

Lower Tribunal No. R.A.A.C. 23

- 00176

________________



### Huseyin Dagli

, Appellant,

vs.



### Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission

, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.

Huseyin Dagli, in proper person.

Amanda L. Neff, Deputy General Counsel (Tallahassee), fo r appellee

Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.

Before FERNANDEZ, SCALES and LOBREE , JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 4.12
                                 EXHIBIT C


                               PROMISSORY NOTE




                                     --------------------- , 199-  


$23,000,000


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned SWVA, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the 
"Company"), promises to pay to the order of THE CIT GROUP/BUSINESS CREDIT, 
INC. (herein "CITBC") at its office located 900 Ashwood Parkway, Atlanta, GA 
30338, in lawful money of the United States of America and in immediately 
available funds, the principal amount equal to the lesser of (i) Twenty-Three 
Million Dollars ($23,000,000) or (ii) the aggregate outstanding principal 
balance of Additional CAPEX Term Loans made to the Company during the period 
from the date hereof to and including July 1, 1998 as reflected on CIT/BC's 
books and records which, subject to the provisions of Section 2, Paragraph 7 
of the Financing Agreement, shall be conclusive proof of the amount 
outstanding hereunder in forty (40) equal quarterly principal installments 
each in the amount of $575,000 until principal balance of this Note is paid 
in full, whereof the first such installment shall be due and payable on July 
1, 1998 and subsequent installments shall be due and payable on the first 
business day of each October, January, April and July thereafter until this 
note is paid in full.

The Company further agrees to pay interest at said office, in like money, on 
the unpaid principal amount owing hereunder from time to time from the date 
of disbursement thereof and at the rate specified in Section 7, paragraph 2 
of the Financing Agreement.

If any payment on this Note becomes due and payable on a day other than a 
business day, the maturity thereof shall be extended to the next succeeding 
business day, and with respect to payments of principal, interest thereon 
shall be payable at the then applicable rate during such extension.

This Note is one of the Promissory Notes referred to in the Financing 
Agreement dated December 30, 1986, between the Company and CITBC, as amended 
(the "Financing Agreement"), evidences the Additional CAPEX Term Loans 
thereunder, and is subject to, and entitled to, all provisions and benefits 
thereof and is subject to optional and mandatory prepayment, in whole or in 
part, as provided therein.


<PAGE>

Upon the occurrence of any one of the Events of Default specified in 
the Financing Agreement or upon termination of the Financing Agreement, all 
amounts then remaining unpaid on this Note may become, or be declared to be, 
at the sole election of CITBC, immediately due and payable as provided in the 
Financing Agreement.

                             SWVA, INC.


                             By:-----------------      
                             Title:
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 86 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 86

                     For the relief of Sung Jun Oh.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 24, 2005

  Mr. Inouye introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                     For the relief of Sung Jun Oh.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Sung Jun Oh 
shall be held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to the 
United States for permanent residence as of the date of the enactment 
of this Act upon payment of any necessary visa fees.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

    Upon the granting of permanent residence to Sung Jun Oh, as 
provided in this Act, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper 
officer to reduce by one number during the current fiscal year the 
total number of immigrant visas available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 202(e) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(e)).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 99.2





Certification of Chief Financial Officer of


Borden Chemicals and Plastics Limited
Partnership





This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Public Company Accounting Reform
and Investor Protection Act of 2002 and accompanies the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the Form 10-Q) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2002, of Borden Chemicals and Plastics Limited Partnership (the Issuer). I, Robert
R. Whitlow, Jr., the Chief Financial Officer of the Issuer, certify that, to the best of my knowledge:





(i)  the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and





(ii)  the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.





Dated: November 14, 2002








/S/    ROBERT R. WHITLOW, JR.Robert R. Whitlow, Jr. Chief Financial Officer




1
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 885 

To authorize funding for the American Prosecutors Research Institute’s National Center for Prosecution of Child Abuse and the American Prosecutors Research Institute’s National Child Protection Training Center at 

Winona State University. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 21, 2005 

Mr. DAYTON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To authorize funding for the American Prosecutors Research 

Institute’s National Center for Prosecution of Child 

Abuse and the American Prosecutors Research Institute’s National Child Protection Training Center at Winona State University. 

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

3 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

4 There are authorized to be appropriated for grants 

5 pursuant to section 214A of the Victims of Child Abuse 

6 Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13003) for technical assistance 
2 

•S 885 IS

1 and training programs (in addition to amounts previously 

2 authorized)— 

3 (1) $4,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 

4 through 2010 to the American Prosecutors Research 

5 Institute’s National Center for Prosecution of Child 

6 Abuse; and 

7 (2) $3,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 

8 through 2010 to the American Prosecutors Research 

9 Institute’s National Child Protection Training Cen10 ter at Winona State University. 

Æ
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 972 

To designate the Albuquerque Indian Health Center as a critical access 

facility and to provide funds for that Center. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 28, 2005 

Mr. BINGAMAN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

A BILL

To designate the Albuquerque Indian Health Center as a 

critical access facility and to provide funds for that Center.

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 ‘‘Albuquerque Indian 

5 Health Center Act of 2005’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CRITICAL ACCESS FACILITY FUNDING. 

7 (a) DEFINITION OF CRITICAL ACCESS FACILITY.—

8 In this section, the term ‘‘critical access facility’’ means 

9 a comprehensive ambulatory care center that provides 
2

•S 972 IS

1 services on a regional basis to Native Americans in Albu2 querque, New Mexico, and surrounding areas. 

3 (b) DESIGNATION.—The Albuquerque Indian Health 

4 Center (also known as the ‘‘Albuquerque Indian Hos5 pital’’) is designated as a critical access facility. 

6 (c) OPERATIONS.— 

7 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Health and 

8 Human Services, acting through the Indian Health 

9 Service, shall provide funds made available under 

10 subsection (d) to the Albuquerque Indian Health 

11 Center to carry out the operations of that Health 

12 Center. 

13 (2) SELF-DETERMINATION CONTRACTS.—The 

14 funds transferred under paragraph (1) shall not be 

15 distributed to any Indian tribe under section 102 of 

16 the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assist17 ance Act (25 U.S.C. 450f). 

18 (d) FUNDING.— 

19 (1) IN GENERAL.—On October 1, 2005, out of 

20 any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appro21 priated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer 

22 to the Secretary of Health and Human Services to 

23 carry out this section $8,000,000, to remain avail24 able until expended. 
3

•S 972 IS

1 (2) RECEIPT AND ACCEPTANCE.—The Sec2 retary shall be entitled to receive, shall accept, and 

3 shall use to carry out this section the funds trans4 ferred under paragraph (1), without further appro5 priation.

Æ
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>            5
<MULTIPLIER>         1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                           8,004
<SECURITIES>                                    18,961
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,278
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (314)
<INVENTORY>                                     24,209
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                69,459
<PP&E>                                          88,766
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (11,905)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 147,209
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,401
<BONDS>                                          5,898
<COMMON>                                           162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     121,440
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   147,209
<SALES>                                         83,390
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                83,390
<CGS>                                           58,805
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   71,763
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 494
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,533
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,938
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,595
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,595
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.59
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.58
        

</TABLE>
656 S.E.2d 374

#### In the Matter of John W. SWAN, Respondent.

No. 26416.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Submitted Nov. 27, 2007.

Decided Jan. 14, 2008.

Lesley M. Coggiola, Disciplinary Counsel and William C. Campbell, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, both of Columbia, for Office of Disciplinary Counsel.

John W. Swan, of North Charleston, Pro Se.

*218PER CURIAM.

In this attorney disciplinary matter, respondent and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel have entered into an Agreement for Discipline by Consent (Agreement) pursuant to Rule 21, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR, in which respondent admits misconduct and consents to the imposition of a confidential admonition or a public reprimand. We accept the Agreement and issue a public reprimand. The facts, as set forth in the Agreement, are as follows.

*Facts*

Respondent wrote a letter to a Workers’ Compensation Commissioner venting outrage over a ruling by the Commission that was adverse to respondent’s client. Respondent admits the tone of and descriptive speech contained in the letter were abusive and brought disrepute and disrespect to a tribunal engaged in the administration of justice, and the letter could be described as disruptive to the tribunal.

In another matter, respondent admits he violated Rule 417, SCACR, by making a check out to “Cash” instead of to the client. Respondent also admits that his failure to adequately safeguard client funds in violation of Rule 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR, caused a check to be reported against his trust account for insufficient funds. Respondent admits he failed to verify that the funds were available in his trust account prior to the issuance of the check that was returned for insufficient funds.

*Law*

Respondent admits that he has violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 407, SCACR: Rule 1.15(a) (lawyer shall safeguard client funds and comply with Rule 417, SCACR); Rule 3.5(d)(lawyer shall not engage in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal); and Rule 8.4(e) (it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice). In addition, respondent admits he has violated Rule 7(a)(1) of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement, Rule 413, SCACR (lawyer shall not violate Rules of Professional Conduct or any other rules of this jurisdiction regarding profes*219sional conduct of lawyers). Finally, respondent admits he violated Rule 417, SCACR.

*Conclusion*

We find respondent’s misconduct warrants a public reprimand. Accordingly, we accept the Agreement and publicly reprimand respondent for his misconduct.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, PLEICONES and BEATTY, JJ., concur.