alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The State of TexasAppellee



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

June 16, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00183

- CR

Richard LARES

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2006CR10110 Honorable Juanita A. Vasquez

- Gardner, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

On June 12 , 2015 , Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw from this a ppeal

. See Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967) ; High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1978) . In counsel’s brief and motion, Appellant’s counsel explained that he took the following steps:

(1) notified Appellant that counsel filed an Anders brief and a motion to withdraw, and provided Appellant with a copy of the documents;

(2) advised Appellant of his right to review the appellate record and file a pro se brief; and

(3) provided Appellant with a copy of the clerk’s and reporter s ’ records.

See Kelly v. State , 436 S.W.3d 313, 318

– 20 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014); Ex parte Owens

, 206 S.W.3d 670 , 674 n. 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); Meza v. State , 206 S.W.3d 684 , 688

– 89 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006).

The State filed a letter conditionally waiving its right to file a brief.

If Appellant desires to file a pro se brief, we ORDER Appellant to do so within thirty days of the date of this order

. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). If Appellant files a pro se brief, theState may file a responsive brief not later than thirty days after th e date Appellant’s pro se brief is filed in this court. See id. R. 38.6(b).

After all briefing is completed, this court will issue an opinion and judgment that disposes of th e appeal. If , in the issued opinion, this court determines that Appellant’s appe al is frivolous, Appellant has a right to file a pro se petition for discretionary review with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. See Kelly , 436 S.W.3d at 319. Appellant may file the petition by writing to the Clerk of the Court of Criminal Appeals, P. O. Box 12308, Austin, Texas 78711

- 2308.

C ounsel’s motion to withdraw is held in abeyance pending further order of this court.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 16th day of June, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
                                                                                               EXHIBIT 12

                           APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY
        Computation of Consolidated Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                        (in thousands except ratio data)

<CAPTION>


                                                                    Year Ended December 31,
                                                      1998        1999      2000    2001       2002
<S>                                                   <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>       <C>
Fixed Charges:
  Interest on First Mortgage Bonds                   $ 72,057  $ 65,697  $ 56,003  $ 48,441   $ 43,743
  Interest on Other Long-term Debt                     40,642    50,712    59,559    61,045     67,212
  Interest on Short-term Debt                           4,245     5,959     8,847    10,722      4,890
  Miscellaneous Interest Charges                       11,470     8,212    26,284     4,285      6,453
  Estimated Interest Element in Lease Rentals           5,900     6,100     6,300     5,800      4,500
     Total Fixed Charges                             $134,314  $136,680  $156,993  $130,293   $126,798

Earnings:
  Income Before Extraordinary Item                   $ 93,330  $120,492  $ 64,906  $161,818   $205,492
  Plus Federal Income Taxes                            43,941    70,950   117,872    81,934    100,974
  Plus State Income Taxes                               6,845     5,085    15,307    14,789      9,952
  Plus Fixed Charges (as above)                       134,314   136,680   156,993   130,293    126,798
     Total Earnings                                  $278,430  $333,207  $355,078  $388,834   $443,216

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                       2.07      2.43      2.26      2.98       3.49
</TABLE>
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 Synergx Systems Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul Mendez, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, and I, John A. Poserina, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge,
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.








/s/Paul Mendez




Chief
Executive Officer


Synergx
Systems Inc.


August 13, 2008












/s/John
A. Poserina




Chief
Financial  Officer


Synergx
Systems Inc.


August 13, 2008
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3074 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3074

To provide that Members of Congress shall not receive a cost of living 
               adjustment in pay during fiscal year 2011.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 4, 2010

Mr. Burr (for himself, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Isakson, 
 and Mr. Johanns) introduced the following bill; which was read twice 
  and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that Members of Congress shall not receive a cost of living 
               adjustment in pay during fiscal year 2011.

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

SECTION 1. NO COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IN PAY OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no adjustment shall be 
made under section 601(a) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 
(2 U.S.C. 31) (relating to cost of living adjustments for Members of 
Congress) during fiscal year 2011.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7805

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GRADY LASSITER, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry Coke Morgan, Jr., District

Judge. (CR-01-154; CA-03-443-2)

Submitted: July 12, 2004 Decided: July 27, 2004

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Grady Lassiter, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Grady Lassiter, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s

order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. Lassiter

cannot appeal this order unless a circuit judge or justice issues

a certificate of appealability, and 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 habeas

appellant meets this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

326 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude Lassiter 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
#### In re M.D.D.

Case below: 181 N.C. App. 148

No. 056P07

1. Respondent’s (Mother) PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA06-657)

2. Guardian Ad Litem’s Conditional PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31

1. Denied 03/08/07

2. Dismissed as Moot 03/08/07
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                  5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted  from  this
Consolidated  Statement of Financial  Condition at June 30, 1999 (Unaudited) and
the  Consolidated  Statement  of Income for the Three and Nine Months Ended June
30, 1999  (Unaudited)  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             179,616
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,466,237
<ALLOWANCES>                                       233,814
<INVENTORY>                                      2,382,129
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,393,711
<PP&E>                                           1,255,474
<DEPRECIATION>                                     947,185
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,078,202
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,061,343
<BONDS>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                             1,571
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                               0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,078,202
<SALES>                                         12,336,737
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,336,737
<CGS>                                            8,359,517
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,927,523
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 187,109
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    409,214
<INCOME-TAX>                                       115,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                294,214
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       294,214
<EPS-BASIC>                                          .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .17


</TABLE>
Exhibit
24.2





CERTIFICATE
 
 I, Steven L. Frey, hereby certify that I am the
Secretary of Angelica Corporation, a Missouri corporation, with its principal
office in the County of St. Louis, State of Missouri, and as such in charge of
its corporate records, including minutes of meetings of its shareholders and
Board of Directors.
 
 I further certify that the Board of Directors
of the Company adopted the following resolutions under date of March 27, 2008,
which resolutions have not since been amended or rescinded and are in full force
and effect at the date hereof:
 
 “FURTHER RESOLVED,
That Stephen M. O’Hara, Steven L. Frey and James W. Shaffer, or any of them, are
hereby authorized to do all acts and things and to execute any and all
instruments on behalf of the Company, including the execution of the Company's
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 26, 2008, or any
amendment thereto, relating to compliance with the reporting requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which said attorneys, or any of them, may deem
necessary or advisable to enable the Company to comply with the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and any rules, regulations and requirements of the
Securities and Exchange Commission in respect thereof;
 
 FURTHER RESOLVED,
That this Board of Directors does approve the execution by the directors and
officers of the Company or any of them, of a Power of Attorney in favor of
Stephen M. O’Hara, Steven L. Frey and James W. Shaffer, or any of them (with
power of substitution in each), empowering such attorneys, or any of them, to do
all acts and things and  to execute any and all instruments on behalf
of such directors and officers, including the execution of the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 26, 2008 and all
amendments thereto, which such attorneys, or any of them, may deem necessary or
advisable to enable the Company to comply with the reporting requirements of the
Securities and Exchange Commission in respect thereof.”
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
and affixed the seal of the said corporation this 10th day of April,
2008.


/s/ Steven L.
Frey


Steven
L. Frey


Secretary





[SEAL]
#### Kareemah BELL-BOSTON, Appellant v. HARRIET TUBMAN WOMEN’S 12 HOUR LOW BARRIER SHELTER, Appellee.

No. 09-7020.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

May 6, 2009.

Kareemah Bell-Boston, Landover Hills, MD, pro se.

BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge; and HENDERSON and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. *See*Fed. RApp. P. 34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed December 2, 2008, 2008 WL 5085613, be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because it is not a civil action arising under federal law, *see*28 U.S.C. § 1331, or between citizens of different states with an amount in controversy of more than $75,000, *see*28 U.S.C. § 1332.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JODI AYN MUMFORD-PORTER a/k/a JODI AYN PORTER, individually 

and as successor trustee of THE MUMFORD FAMILY LIVING TRUST

UNDER AGREEMENT DATED SEPTEMBER 5, 2001,

Appellant,

v.

U.S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as trustee of THE 

CHALET SERIES IV TRUST,

Appellee.

No. 4D2022-3433

[March 14, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Andrea Ruth Gundersen, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE17004053.

Nicole R. Moskowitz of Neustein Law Group, P.A., Aventura, for 

appellant.

Gray Proctor, Morristown, New Jersey, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Exhibit 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

We, Lei Gu, Chief Executive Officer and Patrick Wong, Chief Financial Officer, of Zoom Technologies, Inc.,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that to the best of our knowledge:

1. the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company for the period ended September 30, 2013 (the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

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

Date: November 25, 2013

/s/ Lei Gu            
Lei Gu
Chief Executive Officer
and/s/ Patrick Wong
Patrick Wong
Chief Financial Officer

The material contained in Exhibit 32.0 is not deemed "filed" with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
filing.

---
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than June 22, 2009.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta**                     (Steve Foley, Vice President) 1000 Peachtree Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30309:                

*1. John H. Sykes and Charles Sykes*, both of Tampa, Florida, Katherine Stroker, James Stroker, and Karen Taylor, all of Windermere, Florida; to acquire additional voting shares of NorthStar Banking Corporation, and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of NorthStar Bank, both of Tampa, Florida.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 2, 2009.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E9-13145 Filed 6-4-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
FY20 vs FY19 GGR Comparison

• FY20 GGR = $27.8B

• $6.7B, or 19.5%, 

down from FY19

• 524 Submissions

• 248 Tribes

FY20 FY19 Inc / (Dec) %

Portland $ 3,115,639,674 $ 3,811,460,603 $ (695,820,929) (18.3%)

Sacramento 8,398,732,119 9,680,299,513 (1,281,567,394) (13.2%)

Phoenix 2,358,077,411 3,275,522,440 (917,445,029) (28.0%)

St. Paul 3,730,300,247 4,922,393,815 (1,192,093,568) (24.2%)

Rapid City 238,635,440 376,486,722 (137,851,282) (36.6%)

Tulsa 2,104,460,609 2,468,143,914 (363,683,305) (14.7%)

Oklahoma City 2,064,025,328 2,669,838,721 (605,813,393) (22.7%)

Washington DC 5,822,544,712 7,374,396,307 (1,551,851,595) (21.0%)

Total $ 27,832,415,540 $ 34,578,542,035 $ (6,746,126,495) (19.5%)
-  Home 
        -  Health Information 
        -  Healthy Moments Radio Broadcast 
        -  Healthy Moments Episodes 
        -  Oral Health Across Your Lifespan  

Healthy Moments Episodes
-  Oral Health Across Your Lifespan  

**@NIDDKgov on X**RSS Feed

# Oral Health Across Your Lifespan 

Healthy Moments Episode:Oct. 23, 2023
Whether you’re 5 or 50, caring for your teeth is an important part of overall health.

Listen Now

Download the MP3 audio file(MP3, 1.94 MB)**

## Transcript

**DR. RODGERS:** Some forms of health care, like testing for heart disease, only become essential in our later years. Taking care of your oral health, however, is a life-long commitment.

Hi, I’m Dr. Griffin Rodgers, a director at the NIH. My colleague, Dr. Rena D’Souza, Director of the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, explains.

**DR. D’SOUZA:** Whether you’re 5 or 50, caring for your teeth is an important part of overall health. But the dental challenges we face are different in each stage of life. Taking care of your child’s teeth allows them to chew their food and grow adult teeth. Cavities also form more quickly in baby teeth.

As we age, we become more vulnerable to gum disease and tooth loss. Brushing and flossing regularly can help prevent these conditions.

**DR. RODGERS:** For best oral health outcomes, see your dentist for a checkup at least once a year. Parents should take children to their first dental appointment at around 12 months of age.

Follow us    @NIDDKgov.

## Related Information

- Children’s Oral Health
- Oral Health & Older Adults

Share this page
FacebookXEmailWhatsAppLinkedInRedditPinterest
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 4, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

135115 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

WALTER RIEPEN,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 135115 

 COA: 275413 

WCAC: 95-000907 

KELSEY HAYES COMPANY -

MILFORD, 

 Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 11, 2007 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

l0528 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

June 4, 2008 

 Clerk