alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 23, 2016

s1122 

# Order

Clerk November 23, 2016

153290

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 153290

COA: 323316

Wayne CC: 13

- 009150

- FC

THOMAS LEE WINGARD,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 14, 2016

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We DIRECT the Wayne County

Prosecuting Attorney to answer the application for leave to appeal within 28 days after

the date of this order. The prosecutor shall specifically address: (1) whether the

defendant’s August 28, 2013 statement was inadmissible under Missouri v Seibert , 542

US 600 (2004); and (2) if so, whether defense counsel’s failure to challenge the

admissibility of the statement constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.

The application for leave to appeal remains pending.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

ROBERT C. LEE , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 20 2 4

- 0063

[ May 2, 2024 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.8 5 0 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Leon M. Firtel , Judge; L.T. Case No. 17

- 010013CF10A

.

No brief filed for appellant

.
No appearance required for appellee

.

P ER C URI A M

.
Affirmed

.

W ARNER , M AY and C ONNER , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### Dale R. San Marco et al., Appellants, v Village/Town of Mount Kisco, Respondent.

Submitted January 24, 2011;

decided February 24, 2011

Motion for reargument denied *[see*16 NY3d 111 (2010)].
From: The District Court of the 8th Judicial District. County of Cascade.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. DANIEL COBURN, Defendant,

CAUSE NO. CDC-08-298 DECISION

On April 8, 2009, the defendant was sentenced to the following: Count I: Fifty (50) years in the Montana State Prison, for the offense of Incest, a felony; and Count II: (50) years in the Montana State Prison, for the offense of Incest, a felony. Counts I and II shall run concurrently. The Defendant is ineligible for parole for the first eighteen (18) years. It is further ordered that the Defendant be required to complete both phases I and II of the Montana State Prison Sex Offender Treatment Program prior to any consideration for parole.

On August 6, 2009, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant was present and was represented by Steve Eschenbacher. The state was represented by Susan Weber and Mary Anne Ries.

Before hearing the application, the defendant was advised that the Sentence Review Division has the authority not only to reduce the sentence or affirm it, but also increase it. The defendant was further advised that there is no appeal from a decision of the Sentence Review Division. The defendant acknowledged that he understood this and stated that he wished to proceed.

Rule 17 of the Rules of the Sentence Review Division of the Supreme Court of Montana provides that “the sentence imposed by the District Court is presumed correct, and the sentence will not be reduced or increased unless it is deemed clearly inadequate or excessive.” (§46-18-904(3), MCA).

The Division finds that the reasons advanced for modification are insufficient to hold that the sentence imposed by the District Court is inadequate or excessive.

Therefore, it is the unanimous decision of the Sentence Review Division that the sentence shall be affirmed.

Done in open Court this 6th day of August, 2009.

DATED this 20th day of August, 2009.

Chairperson, Hon. Stewart Stadler, Member, Hon. Blair Jones and Member, Richard Simonton.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 3.10


                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                              AMENDED AND RESTATED
                           ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                                   DISC, INC.


J. Richard Ellis and Henry Madrid certify that:

1.       They are the President and Chief Executive Officer and the Chief
Financial Officer, respectively, of DISC, Inc., a California corporation (the
"Corporation").

2.       The second grammatical sentence of Article III of the Amended and
Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation is amended to read as
follows:

         "The total number of shares of Common Stock this Corporation shall
have authority to issue is 20,000,000, and the total number of shares of
Preferred Stock this Corporation shall have authority to issue is 5,000,000."

3.       The foregoing amendment of the Amended and Restated Articles of
Incorporation has been duly approved by the Board of Directors of the
Corporation.

4.       The foregoing amendment of the Amended and Restated Articles of
Incorporation has been duly approved by the required vote of shareholders in
accordance with Section 902 of the Corporations Code.  The total number of
outstanding shares of the Corporation is 3,288,162 shares of Common Stock,
372,296 shares of Series C Preferred Stock, 444,444 shares of Series D
Preferred Stock, 500,000 shares of Series E Preferred Stock, 250,000 shares of
Series F Preferred Stock, 110,000 shares of Series G Preferred Stock, 26,109
shares of Series H Preferred Stock, and 167,065 shares of Series I Preferred
Stock.  The number of shares voting in favor of the amendment equaled or
exceeded the vote required.  The percentage vote required was more than 50% of
all outstanding shares of Preferred Stock of the Corporation, voting separately
as a class, and more than 50% of all shares of Common Stock and Preferred Stock
of the Corporation, voting together as a class.

         The undersigned declare under penalty of perjury that the matters set
forth in the foregoing Certificate are true of their own knowledge.

         Executed at Milpitas, California on December 30, 1996.


                                      /s/ J. Richard Ellis                      
                                     ---- ---------------------------------
                                      J. Richard Ellis
                                      President and Chief Executive Officer


                                      /s/ Henry Madrid                          
                                      -------------------------------------
                                      Henry Madrid
                                      Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 11
                      DI INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

             COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON STOCK SHARE
                     (in thousands except per share amounts)
                                   (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           THREE MONTHS ENDED       NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                              SEPTEMBER 30,           SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                          --------------------    --------------------
                                                            1996        1995        1996        1995
                                                          --------    --------    --------    --------
<S>                                                       <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>      
Primary earnings (loss) per share:

Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding ...     68,853      38,669      48,812      38,669

Stock options (treasury stock method)(a) ..............       --          --          --          --
                                                          --------    --------    --------    --------
Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding for
     per share computation ............................     68,853      38,669      48,812      38,669
                                                          ========    ========    ========    ========
Net income (loss) .....................................   $    808    $ (1,350)   $   (159)   $ (5,245)

Less:  Series B Preferred Stock subscription
     dividend requirement .............................       (100)       --          (400)       --
                                                          --------    --------    --------    --------

Net income (loss) applicable to common stock ..........   $    708    $ (1,350)   $   (559)   $ (5,245)
                                                          ========    ========    ========    ========

Income (loss) per common share:
     Income (loss) from continuing operations .........   $    .01    $   (.03)   $   (.01)   $   (.12)
     Income (loss) from discontinued operations .......       --          --          --          (.02)
                                                          --------    --------    --------    --------

Net income (loss) per share ...........................   $    .01    $   (.03)   $   (.01)   $   (.14)
                                                          ========    ========    ========    ========
</TABLE>

Note:   Reference is made to Note 2 to Consolidated Financial Statements
        regarding computation of per common stock share amounts.

(a)     Stock options are not included since inclusion would be either
        antidilutive or not significant for all the periods presented.
EXHIBIT 32.3

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



         In connection with the Quarterly Report of CNH Holdings Company on Form
10-QSB for the period ending  September  30, 2005, as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Cynthia  Garr,
Interim C.F.O. 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, to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.


/s/    Cynthia Garr
Cynthia Garr
Interim C.F.O.,
Executive Vice-President of Corporate Development,
and Director
(Principal Financial Officer)


November 14, 2005


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
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.
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width" />
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex">
    <title>Diet & Nutrition - NIDDK</title>
    
<meta name="VIcurrentDateTime" content="638490763177188017" />
<meta name="VirtualFolder" content="/" />
<script type="text/javascript" src="/layouts/system/VisitorIdentification.js"></script>

</head>
<body>
    <div></div>
</body>
</html>
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of Cistera Networks, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the
period ending June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gregory T. Royal, Chief
Executive Officer and 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, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:





(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 the Company
      as of March 31, 2010 and for the periods then
  ended.





/s/ Gregory T. Royal
              Gregory
      T. RoyalChief
      Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting
      Officer)





Date:
August 13, 2010








A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Preston Lamar WILLIAMS, a.k.a. Cowboy, a.k.a. Preston Lee, a.k.a. Space Cowboy, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-16539

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

May 28, 2009.

Preston Lamar Williams, Marianna, FL, pro se.

Judy K. Hunt, United States Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Before BLACK, PRYOR and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Leonard E. Clark, appointed counsel for Preston Lamar Williams in this appeal from the district court’s denial of Williams’s motion to reduce his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and the district court’s denial of relief under § 3582(c)(2) is AFFIRMED.
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 FORM 10-Q/A
 þ
    
    QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008
 COMMISSION FILE NO: 0-17411
 PARKVALE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
  Pennsylvania
    
    25-1556590(State of incorporation)
    
    (I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
 4220 William Penn Highway, Monroeville, Pennsylvania 15146
  þ o
  Large accelerated filer o
    
    Accelerated filer þ
    
    Non-accelerated filer o
    
    Smaller reporting company o(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 o þ




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  PART II  OTHER INFORMATIONSIGNATURESEX-15.1EX-31.1EX-31.2EX-32.1EX-99.1    Table of Contents  EXPLANATORY NOTE
  
 PART II  OTHER INFORMATION
  15.1
    
    Acknowledgement Letter from Parente Randolph, LLC31.1
    
    Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.31.2
    
    Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.32.1
    
    Certification 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 2002.99.1
    
    Report of Parente Randolph, LLC on the Companys interim financial statements.
 
 SIGNATURES
   DATE: February 12, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Robert J. McCarthy, Jr.Robert J. McCarthy, Jr.President and Chief Executive OfficerDATE: February 12, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Timothy G. RubritzTimothy G. RubritzVice President, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Inge L. Mader, Respondent, v Kenny Johnson, Appellant.

Submitted August 23, 2010;

decided October 19, 2010

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 826 

To provide that the conveyance of the former radar bomb scoring site to 

the city of Conrad, Montana, is not subject to reversion. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 18, 2005 

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

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To provide that the conveyance of the former radar bomb 

scoring site to the city of Conrad, Montana, is not subject to reversion. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF RADAR BOMB SCORING SITE, 

4 CONRAD, MONTANA. 

5 Section 2816 of the National Defense Authorization 

6 Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (107 Stat. 1891) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking subsection (c); and 

8 (2) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as 

9 subsections (c) and (d), respectively. 

Æ
PROPST, Special Concurrence: I concur in the opinion. As a trial judge, I have a problem with obtaining a knowing and understanding waiver of appeal with respect to any potential error I might make at sentencing. This concern is not, however, applicable to a waiver of the right to seek a downward departure.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SUPERMARKETS
GENERAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION'S CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE 39
WEEKS ENDED NOVEMBER 1, 1997 AND CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF NOVEMBER 1,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-01-1997
<CASH>                                           9,436
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,385
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,400)
<INVENTORY>                                    203,236
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               283,627
<PP&E>                                         970,039
<DEPRECIATION>                               (418,483)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 956,985
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          396,166
<BONDS>                                      1,289,342
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          106,723
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,308,032)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   956,985
<SALES>                                      2,755,313
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,755,313
<CGS>                                        1,984,908
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,984,908
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   148
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (124,822)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (46,820)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    18,703
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (28,117)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (7,488)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (35,605)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 11.1
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                            A-FEM MEDICAL CORPORATION
                       CALCULATIONS OF NET LOSS PER SHARE

                                                                             For the three months ended
                                                                                      March 31,
                                                                       ----------------------------------------
                                                                              2001                 2000
                                                                       -------------------- -------------------
<S>                                                                    <C>                  <C>
  Actual weighted average shares outstanding for the period                  9,596,558            9,563,225

  Dilutive common and preferred stock, options and warrants using                    -                    -
     the treasury stock method(1)
                                                                       -------------------- -------------------

  Total shares used in per share calculations                                9,596,558            9,563,225
                                                                       -------------------- -------------------

  Net loss                                                              $     (307,575)        $   (428,939)
                                                                       -------------------- -------------------

  Basic and diluted net loss per share                                 $         (0.03)     $         (0.04)
                                                                       ==================== ===================
</TABLE>


(1)      Preferred stock, warrants and options outstanding are not included, as
         the effect would be anti-dilutive.