alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 102 (Friday, May 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 25716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12632]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Meeting on Energy Issues in the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation

AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce will host a two-hour meeting 
during which senior U.S. government officials will brief the business 
community on recent developments in the Asia Pacific Economic 
Cooperation (APEC) on energy issues, including the APEC Energy Working 
Group meeting in Santiago, Chile in April 20-24, 2009. The agenda will 
feature key outcomes from the Santiago meeting, U.S. objectives for 
APEC in 2009, including trade and investment priorities, and a 
discussion on industry engagement and advancing industry's priorities 
in APEC through effective public-private partnerships.

DATES: Date of the event: June 2, 2009, 10 a.m.-Noon; U.S. Department 
of Commerce, Room 4830.

ADDRESSES: To register for this meeting, please contact Man Cho, Office 
of Energy and Environmental Industries; Room 4053; U.S. Department of 
Commerce; 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.; Washington, DC 20230; 202-
482-5159; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4a272b24642922250a272b2326642e2529642d253c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bdd0dcd393ded5d2fdd0dcd4d193d9d2de93dad2cb">[email protected]</span></a>. The meeting will be held at the U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Room 4830.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Man Cho, Office of Energy and 
Environmental Industries; Room 4053; U.S. Department of Commerce; 14th 
& Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.; Washington, DC 20230; 202-482-5159; 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a3cec2cd8dc0cbcce3cec2cacf8dc7ccc08dc4ccd5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0469656a2a676c6b4469656d682a606b672a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you are unable to make the meeting and 
would like further information on this topic, please see the Office of 
Energy and Environmental Industries Web site at http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/energy or contact us as indicated above.
    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to the above contact when registering for this 
meeting.

Cheryl McQueen,
Acting Director, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries, U.S. 
Department of Commerce.
[FR Doc. E9-12632 Filed 5-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT JOHN FRANCIS BRISCOE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. WILLIAM SMITH, Warden; PARRIS N. GLENDENING, Governor; KATHLEEN K. TOWNSEND, Lieutenant; No. 95-7720 BISHOP L. ROBINSON, Secretary of Public Safety; RICHARD LANHAM, Parole Commissioner; PAUL DAVIS, Deputy Commissioner; DAN D. ZACCOGNINI, Commissioner; MICHAEL BLOUNT, Commissioner, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CA-95-2791-DKC) Submitted: February 20, 1996 Decided: March 12, 1996 Before HAMILTON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed in part and vacated and remanded in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.COUNSEL John Francis Briscoe, Appellant Pro Se.

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

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: John Francis Briscoe, a Maryland inmate, claimed in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) action that he was improperly denied parole in August 1995. He also alleged that his next parole eligibility hearing was scheduled for 1997, although he previously had r eceived annual hearings. The district court dismissed the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) (1988). We affirm in part and v acate and remand in part. Briscoe's claim concerning the timing of his parole eligibility reviews is sufficient to survive dismissal under§ 1915(d). If there was a statutory or regulatory amendment which altered the definition ofcriminal conduct or increased the penalty by which a crime is punishable, that amendment should be analyzed for a possible ex post facto violation. See California Dep't of Corrections v. Morales , 63 U.S.L.W. 4327 (U.S. Apr. 25, 1995) (No. 93-1462). The record isdevoid of any reference to any such amendment or regulation, rendering it impossible to conduct an analysis under Morales . We therefore vacate the district court's decision with regard to this claim and remand for an analysis of the claim under the factors set forth in Morales

. To the extent that Briscoe appeals the district court's remaining findings, we have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Briscoe v. Smith , No. CA-95-2791-DKC (D. Md. Sept. 29, 1995). We dispense with oral argument b ecause the facts
2and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART; VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART 3
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Laurel Capital Group, Inc.

In connection with the Annual Report of Laurel Capital Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John A.
Howard, Jr., Senior Vice President 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:

      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 and for the period covered by the Report.

/s/ John A. Howard, Jr.
-----------------------
John A. Howard, Jr.
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
September 29, 2003
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Franklin Benjamin, Appellant.

[963 NYS2d 336]

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, *927Kings County (Foley, J.), dated August 4, 2011, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sexually violent offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

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

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erred in denying his application, following a risk assessment hearing, for a downward departure from a presumptive risk level two designation to a risk level one designation pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act *(see*Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA). A court has the discretion to downwardly depart from the presumptive risk level in a SORA proceeding only after a defendant makes a twofold showing. First, the defendant must identify “as a matter of law, an appropriate mitigating factor, namely, a factor which tends to establish a lower likelihood of reoffense or danger to the community and is of a kind, or to a degree, that is otherwise not adequately taken into account by the Guidelines” *(People v Wyatt,*89 AD3d 112, 128 [2011]; *see*Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 4 [2006]). Second, the defendant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence the facts necessary to support that mitigating factor *(see People v Wyatt,*89 AD3d at 128).

Here, the defendant failed to satisfy the threshold condition of identifying an appropriate mitigating factor. The scholarly articles and other publications cited by the defendant in his appellate brief do not constitute “relevant materials and evidence submitted by the sex offender” (Correction Law § 168-n [3]), and are therefore “outside the record on appeal” *(People v DeDona,*102 AD3d 58, 70 [2012]). Since the defendant failed to establish before the Supreme Court that any of the factors he cited “tend[ ] to establish a lower likelihood of reoffense or danger to the community” *(.People v Wyatt,*89 AD3d at 128), the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s application for a downward departure *(see People v Shephard,*101 AD3d 978, 978-979 [2012]).

Mastro, J.E, Austin, Cohen and Miller, JJ., concur.
---

CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Howard Thomson, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer of Terrace Ventures Inc. (the Company), hereby 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:

|(i)  | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company, for the
      fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2008, and to which this certification is
      attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
|---- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|(ii) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                                                                       



| | By:    | /s/
      Howard Thomson   
| | ------ | ---------------------------
| |        |                            
| | Name:  | HOWARD THOMSON             
| |        |                            
| | Title: | Chief Executive Officer and
| |        | Chief Financial Officer    
| |        |                            
| | Date:  | September 19, 2008         



A signed original of this written statement required by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.

This certification accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it
relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is
not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made
before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing.

---
#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ERROL MANN, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 04-137.

Submitted on Briefs December 21, 2005.

Decided May 23, 2006.

Withdrawn May 30, 2006.

2006 MT 116.

332 Mont. 215.

ORDER

On May 23, 2006, this Court prematurely issued its Opinion in this matter.

IT IS ORDERED that this Court’s May 23, 2006 Opinion in 04-137, *State of Montana v. Errol Mann,*2006 MT 116, is hereby withdrawn pending issuance of an opinion at a later date.

The Clerk is directed to immediately notify, either telephonically or via facsimile, the Honorable Kenneth R. Neill, District Judge and all counsel of record of this Order. The Clerk is further directed to mail a copy of this order to Judge Neill and all counsel of record.

DATED this 30th day of May, 2006.

For the Court,

/S/KARLA M. GRAY
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-07135 and No. 333-28991) pertaining to the Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, the 1996 Stock Option Plan and 401(k) Salary Reduction Plan and
Trust of Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and in the Registration Statement (Form
S-3) and related Prospectus of Ribozyme Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of our report
dated February 23, 2001, with respect to the financial statements of Ribozyme
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2000.


/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Denver, Colorado
March 30, 2001
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Nisean Graves, Appellant.

[975 NYS2d 895]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), rendered November 30, 2010, convicting him of attempted rape in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. By decision and order of this Court dated May 8, 2012, the matter was remitted to the County Court, Westchester County, to hear and determine the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, and the appeal was held in abeyance in the interim *(see People v Graves,*95 AD3d 1034 [2012]). The County Court has now submitted its report. By decision and order on motion of this Court dated April 26, 2013, the motion of Carl D. Birman for leave to withdraw as counsel was granted and Richard L. Herzfeld was assigned to serve and file a supplemental brief, if he be so advised, regarding the hearing on the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty and the new determination by the County Court, Westchester County, of that motion. Richard L. Herzfeld has submitted a supplemental brief in accordance with *Anders v California*(386 US 738 [1967]), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

*651Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In a decision and order dated May 8, 2012, this Court determined that the defendant’s right to counsel was adversely affected when his attorney took a position adverse to him on his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty. We therefore remitted the matter to the County Court, Westchester County, for the appointment of new counsel, followed by a hearing on the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty and a new determination of the motion thereafter *(see People v Graves,*95 AD3d 1034 [2012]). The County Court now reports that it appointed new counsel for the defendant, held a hearing on his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, and denied the motion.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the supplemental brief filed by Richard L. Herzfeld pursuant to *Anders v California*(386 US 738 [1967]), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on the appeal. Richard L. Herzfeld’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.],*89 AD3d 252 [2011]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Rivera, J.E, Dillon, Angiolillo and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of Wolverine Tube, Inc. on Form 10-Q for
the period ending October 3, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis J. Horowitz, Chief
Executive Officer of Wolverine Tube, Inc., 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 and 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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Wolverine Tube, Inc. and will be retained by Wolverine Tube, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

/s/  Dennis J. Horowitz

Dennis J. Horowitz
Chief Executive Officer
November 12, 2004
This memorandum opinion was not selected for pub lication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Please see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations fr om the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the filing date. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 1 STATE OF NEW MEXICO, 2 Plaintiff-Appellee, 3
v. NO. 35,737 4 IANN ISLAS, 5 Defendant-Appellant. 6 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 7 Briana H. Zamora, District Judge 8 Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General 9 Santa Fe, NM 10 for Appellee 11 Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender 12 Santa Fe, NM 13 Josephine H. Ford, Assistant Public Defender 14 Albuquerque, NM 15 for Appellant 16 MEMORANDUM OPINION 17 VANZI, Chief Judge. 182 {1} Defendant-Appellant Iann Islas (Defendant) has sought to appeal his conviction 1 of driving while intoxicated (DWI). Wepreviously issued a notice of proposed 2 summary disposition in which we proposedto affirm. Defendant has filed a 3 memorandum in opposition. After due cons ideration, we remain unpersuaded. 4 {2} In his memorandum in opposition, Defe ndant presents no new arguments but 5 reiterates his position that the DWI roadbl ock pursuant to which he was seized was 6 unconstitutional and that the results of his breath alcohol test were admitted in error. 7 [MIO 2-5] We remain unpers uaded by Defendant’s arguments. Accordingly, for the 8 reasons stated in the notice of proposed summary disposition, we affirm. 9 {3} IT IS SO ORDERED. 10

__________________________________ 11 LINDA M. VANZI, Chief Judge 12 WE CONCUR: 13

_________________________________ 14 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge 15

_________________________________ 16 M. MONICA ZAMORA, Judge 17
<PAGE>

                                                               Exhibit 23.2

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
pertaining to the 1992 Stock Option and Incentive Plan of Kankakee Bancorp, 
Inc., of our report dated January 30, 1997, with respect to the consolidated 
financial statements of Kankakee Bancorp, Inc. incorporated by reference in 
the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1996.

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration 
Statement pertaining to the Kankakee Federal Amended and Restated 401 (K) 
Savings Plan of our report dated January 30, 1997, with respect to the 
consolidated financial statements of Kankakee Bancorp, Inc. incorporated by 
reference in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 
1996.


/s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP

Champaign, Illinois
March 21, 1997
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 ofChapter 63of Title 18 of the United States Code**

 

I, Steven T. Campbell,the chief financial officer of United States Cellular Corporation, certify that(i) the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the first quarter of 2009fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained inthe Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of United States Cellular Corporation.

 

 
|   | /s/  Steven T. Campbell |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Steven  T. Campbell     |
|   | May 6,  2009       |

 

A signed original ofthis written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002 has been provided to United States Cellular Corporation and will beretained by U.S. Cellular and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Order entered December 21, 2012

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 12
- 00925
- CR
BILLY LUFTHANSA BARNES, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7 Dallas County, Texas Tr ial Court Cause No. F12
- 22227
- Y 

### O RDER
T he Court REINSTATES this appeal. On November 15, 2012, we denied court reporter Sharon Hazlewood’s second request for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record and ordered the trial court to make findings

r egarding the record. We ADOPT the findings that: (1) appellant desires to pursue the appeal; (2) appellant is indigent and represented by counsel from the Dallas County Public Defender’s Office; (3) counsel timely requested the reporter’s record; (4) Sha ron Hazlewood is the court reporter who recorded the proceedings; (5) Ms. Hazlewood’s explanation for the delay in filing the record is her workload and her mistaken belief the record was due December 21, 2012; and (6) Ms. Hazlewood should be given thirty days from the December 17, 2012 hearing to file the record.Although she indicated she could file the record by January 17, 2013, we ORDER Sharon Hazlewood to file the reporter’s record in this appeal by JANUARY 21 , 2013 . Because the record is already two months overdue, no further extensions will be granted. If the record is not filed by the date specified, the Court will order that Sharon Hazlewood not sit as a court reporter until she files the record in this appeal.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to the Honorable Michael Snipes, Presiding Judge, Criminal District Court No. 7; Sharon Hazlewood, official court reporter, Criminal District Court No. 7, and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ DAVID L. BRIDGES JUS TICE
#### In the Matter of Clint R. Peterson, Appellant, v Carl F. Becker, as Judge of the County Court of Delaware County, Respondent.

Submitted June 21, 2010;

decided September 2, 2010

*817Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the issues presented have become moot. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.