alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. WR-74,963-02 and 03

EX PARTE JOSE PABLO GUARDIOLA, Applicant

ON APPLICATIONS FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NOS. 2008CR1071-W1 and 2008CR1072-W1 IN THE 175th DISTRICT COURT

FROM BEXAR COUNTY

Per curiam.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court these applications for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex

parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession

of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and possession of marihuana. He was sentenced to

ten years’ imprisonment in each cause. He did not appeal these convictions. 

Applicant contends, inter alia, that material and exculpatoryevidence was withheld from the

defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 US 83 (1963). Specifically, the defense was not

made aware of misconduct on the part of the arresting officers that included lying about the use of

a confidential informant in order to obtain a search warrant.
2

The trial court determined that due process was violated in these cases and recommends that

relief be granted on a basis other than Brady. The State agrees that relief should be granted. We

disagree with the trial court’s conclusion of law, but agree that Applicant is entitled to relief. While

it is clear from the record that the Bexar County District Attorney’s Office was unaware of the police

misconduct that occurred in this case, the prosecutor has a duty to pass along evidence even if it is

only known to the police. Kyles v. Whitley, 115 S.Ct. 1555, 514 U.S. 419, 131 L.Ed. 490 (1995). 

Relief is granted. The judgments in Cause Nos. 2008CR1070-W1 and 2008CR1072-W1 in

the 175th District Court of Bexar County are set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody

of the Sheriff of Bexar County to answer the charges as set out in the indictments. The trial court

shall issue any necessary bench warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: January 29, 2014

Do not publish
Second Department,

January, 2009

(January 13, 2009)

#### Astoria Federal Savings & Loan Assoc., Plaintiff, v James J. Hartridge, Respondent. ARO Capital, LLC, Nonparty Appellant; Best Nest Realty et al., Nonparty Respondents.

[869 NYS2d 921]

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the nonparty ARO Capital, LLC, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nas*585sau County (Palmieri, J.), dated September 25, 2007, which granted the defendant’s motion to vacate the foreclosure sale.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In the exercise of its equitable powers, a court has the discretion to set aside a foreclosure sale where there is evidence of fraud, collusion, mistake, or misconduct *(see Guardian Loan Co. v Early,*47 NY2d 515, 521 [1979]; *Dime Sav. Bank of N.Y. v Zapala,*255 AD2d 547, 548 [1998]; *Provident Sav. Bank v Bordes,*244 AD2d 470 [1997]). “Absent such conduct, the mere inadequacy of price is an insufficient reason to set aside a sale unless the price is so inadequate as to shock the court’s conscience” *(Dime Sav. Bank of N.Y. v Zapala,*255 AD2d at 548; *see Bankers Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v House,*182 AD2d 602 [1992]). Here, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in setting aside the foreclosure sale on the ground that the sale price was unconscionably low *(see Pisano v Tupper,*188 AD2d 991, 993 [1992]).

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Miller, J.E, Angiolillo, Belen and Chambers, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John Parisi, Appellant.

Submitted August 16, 2010;

decided August 26, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Robert C. Mitchell, Esq., Legal Aid Society of Suffolk County, Inc., Arthur M. Cromarty Court Complex, 300 Center Drive, PO Box 1697, Riverhead, New York 11901 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
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 Gexa Corp. (the "Company") on Form
10-QSB/A for the period ending September 30, 2003 (the "Report"), as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Neil Leibman,
Chief Executive 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, as amended; and

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


------------------------
Neil Leibman
Chief Executive Officer
Dated: March 9, 2004
THE
      SECURITIES OFFERED HEREBY HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT
      OF
      1933 OR THE SECURITIES LAWS OF ANY STATE AND ARE BEING OFFERED AND SOLD IN
      RELIANCE ON EXEMPTIONS FROM THE REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS OF THE SECURITIES
      ACT
      OF 1933 AND SUCH LAWS. THE SECURITIES ARE SUBJECT TO RESTRICTIONS ON
      TRANSFERABILITY AND RESALE AND MAY NOT BE TRANSFERRED OR RESOLD EXCEPT AS
      PERMITTED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933 AND SUCH LAWS PURSUANT TO
      REGISTRATION OR EXEMPTION THEREFROM. 

     

    COMMON
      STOCK PURCHASE WARRANT

    January
      12, 2006

    


    Certificate
      Representing 30,000 Warrants 

    To
      Purchase Shares of Common Stock of

    


    CYTOMEDIX,
      INC.

    


    THIS
      IS
      TO CERTIFY THAT, for value received, The Wall Street Group, Inc., or its
      assigns, (the “Holder”), is entitled to purchase from Cytomedix, Inc., a
      Delaware corporation (the “Company”), Thirty Thousand (30,000) shares of the
      Company’s common stock, par value $.001 per share (the “Common Stock”), on the
      terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.

    


    I. Grant
      and Vesting.
      The
      Company hereby grants to the Holder warrants (the “Warrants”) to purchase up to
      Thirty Thousand (30,000) shares of Common Stock at a purchase price equal to
      $6.00 per share. The Warrants shall vest as follows: 12,500 shares of Common
      Stock shall vest immediately; 2,500 shares of Common Stock February 1, 2006;
      2,500 shares of Common Stock March 1, 2006; 2,500 shares of Common Stock April
      1, 2006; 2,500 shares of Common Stock May 1, 2006; 2,500 shares of Common Stock
      June 1, 2006; 2,500 shares of Common Stock July 1, 2006; and 2,500 shares of
      Common Stock August 1, 2006. 

    


    II. Exercise
      Period.
      The
      Warrants shall be exercisable commencing on the date of original issuance of
      the
      Warrants and continue to be exercisable until 5:00 p.m., Central Standard Time,
      January 11, 2011.

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the
      Company has caused this Warrant Certificate to be duly executed and delivered
      as
      of the 12th day of January, 2006.

     

    
      	 	 	 
	 	
              CYTOMEDIX,
                INC.

            
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	
            	
            	/s/ Kshitij
              Mohan
	 	
              
Kshitij
              Mohan
	 	Chief
              Executive Officer
The District Court of the 15th Judicial District. County of Roosevelt.

#### STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff, vs. BRADLEY TRAEHOLT, Defendant.

CAUSE NO. DC-09-11 DECISION

*102On May 5, 2010, the defendant was sentenced to a commitment to the Department of Corrections for a term of twenty (20) years, with sixteen (16) years suspended, for the offense of Count I: Criminal Possession of Precursors to Dangerous Drugs, a Felony.

On November 4, 2010, the defendant’s application for review of that sentence was heard by the Sentence Review Division of the Montana Supreme Court.

The defendant appeared via teleconference and was represented by Lindsey Pilecki. The state was not represented.

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 4th day of November, 2010.

DATED this 18th day of November, 2010.

Chairperson, Hon. Blair Jones, Member, Hon. Richard Simonton and Member, Hon. Ray Dayton.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (TAP) is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Thursday, March 26, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janice Spinks at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Small Business/Self Employed Issue Committee of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Thursday, March 26, 2009, at 8:30 a.m. Pacific Time via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096, or write to Janice Spinks, TAP Office, 915 2nd Avenue, MS W-406, Seattle, WA 98174 or you can contact us at                     *http://www.improveirs.org*. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Janice Spinks. Ms. Spinks can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6096.                

*The agenda will include the following:*                     Various IRS issues.                

Dated: January 13, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins, 

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

 [FR Doc. E9-1270 Filed 1-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Rogers, Appellant.

[961 NYS2d 796]

—Appeal by the de*777fendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (J. Goldberg, J.), imposed October 28, 2008, upon his conviction of robbery in the second degree and unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, the resentence being a period of postrelease supervision in addition to the determinate terms of imprisonment previously imposed on March 22, 2000.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

Since the defendant had not yet completed his originally imposed sentence of imprisonment when he was resentenced, his resentencing to include the statutorily required period of postrelease supervision did not subject him to double jeopardy or violate his right to due process of law *(see People v Lingle,*16 NY3d 621 [2011]; *People v Louis,*90 AD3d 1075 [2011]; *People v Dawkins,*87 AD3d 550 [2011]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Skelos, J.E, Chambers, Sgroi and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11


                                   DISC, INC.

                      COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE (1)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Year
                                                                                  December 31,
                                                             1996                     1995                    1994
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                  <C>                     <C>                      <C>
Net loss                                             $(3,342,000)            $(2,826,000)             $(2,945,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted average shares outstanding:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Common Stock                                         3,105,508               3,004,923                2,962,960
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted average common shares and                   3,105,508               3,004,923                2,962,960
equivalents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net loss per share                                   $(1.08)                 $(0.94)                  $(0.99)
                                                     =======                 =======                  =======
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>


--------------------------
     (1) This Exhibit should be read with Note 2 of Notes to Financial
         Statements.
[ EXHIBIT 23.1 - CONSENT ]

Chromatics Color Sciences International, Inc.
Riverdale, New York

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements filed on Form S-3 of our report dated April 13, 2001, except for Note
3, which is July 3, 2001, relating to the financial statements of Chromatics
Color Sciences International, Inc., appearing in the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001. Our report contains an
explanatory paragraph regarding the Company's ability as a going concern.


BDO Seidman, LLP
New York, New York

April 24, 2002
#### Perkinson v. Hawley

Case below: 179 N.C. App. 225

No. 457P06

Pit’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA05-1685)

Denied 06/27/07
Exhibit 10.20



FIRST AMENDMENT

TO THE

PLAINS EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY

LONG-TERM RETENTION AGREEMENT



WHEREAS, Plains Exploration & Production Company (the Company) and
 (Executive) entered into the Plains Exploration & Production Company Long-Term Retention Agreement
(the Agreement) dated effective as of the 10th day of February, 2006 (the Effective Date); and



WHEREAS, the Company and Executive have agreed to amend the Agreement as set forth below;



NOW, THEREFORE, effective as of the Effective Date, the parties hereto
agree as follows:



|1. | The following sentence shall be added to paragraph 4 of the Agreement:
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------



The amount so credited to Executives Account shall then be contributed by the Company in cash, Common Stock or other property to the Trust
created under the Plan to be held by the trustee of such Trust until paid according to the terms of this Agreement, to Executive.



|2. | The words a Deferral Election or shall be stricken from the first sentence of paragraph 5 of the Agreement.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | The first sentence of paragraph 6 of the Agreement shall be deleted.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------



|4. | As modified herein, the Agreement is hereby ratified and affirmed in all respects.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have signed this to be effective set forth above.



|                                        |  |  |  |       |  | 
|--------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ----- |  | 
|PLAINS EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION COMPANY |  |  |  |      
|                                        |  | 
|By:                                     |  |  |  | Date:
|Name:                                   |  |  |  |       |  | 
|Title:                                  |  |  |  |       |  | 
|                                        |  | 
|Executive                               |  |  |  |      
|                                        |  | 
|By:                                     |  |  |  | Date:
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

          - [Docket Nos. ER09-900-001; ER09-901-001; ER09-902-001] 

Take notice that on May 21, 2009, Sky River LLC, Victory Garden Phase IV, LLC, and FPL Energy Cabazon Wind, LLC filed an amendment to market-based rate tariffs. 

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. 

                    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at                     *http://www.ferc.gov.*                     Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.                 

                    This filing is accessible on-line at                     *http://www.ferc.gov,*                     using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,*                     or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                 

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 29, 2009.                 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E9-12695 Filed 6-1-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2509 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2509

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Mixtures of N-phenyl-N-
  ((trichloromethyl)thio)-benzenesulfonamide, calcium carbonate, and 
                              mineral oil.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Mixtures of N-phenyl-N-
  ((trichloromethyl)thio)-benzenesulfonamide, calcium carbonate, and 
                              mineral oil.

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

SECTION 1. MIXTURES OF N-PHENYL-N-((TRICHLOROMETHYL)THIO)-
              BENZENESULFONAMIDE, CALCIUM CARBONATE, AND MINERAL OIL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.38.31 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to mixtures of N-phenyl-N-
((trichloromethyl)thio)-benzenesulfonamide, calcium carbonate, and 
mineral oil) is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/
31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```