alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Johnson, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 606]

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v*Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The People’s case, although circumstantial, included evidence that at the time of the shooting, the defendant was seen in the immediate vicinity of the vehicle in which the victim was shot, had a motive, fled to Alabama after the incident, and lived under an assumed identity *(see People v Yazum,*13 NY2d 302, 304 [1963]; *see also People v Robinson,*10 AD3d 696 [2004]; *People v Jamison,*173 AD2d 341, 342 [1991]). Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to permit a rational juror to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]).

The defendant contends that the prosecution witnesses, because of their criminal histories and involvement with illegal drugs, should not have been believed by the jury. However, resolution of issues of credibility is primarily a matter to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witness, and its determination should be accorded great deference on appeal *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]; *People v Mateo,*2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], *cert denied*542 US 946 [2004]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

*665When a defendant seeks to introduce evidence that a third party may have committed the crime, the court must weigh the probative value of such evidence against its potential for undue prejudice, trial delay, and jury confusion *(see People v Primo,*96 NY2d 351, 356 [2001]). Evidence of third-party culpability may not rest on mere suspicion, surmise, or speculation *(id.*at 357; *see People v Paixao,*23 AD3d 677, 678 [2005]; *People v Diehl,*6 AD3d 455 [2004]). Here, the trial court properly denied the defendant’s request to cross-examine a witness regarding an alleged plan by the victim to commit a crime which, if actually committed, might have motivated unnamed third parties to kill the victim. Prudenti, P.J., Miller, Dillon and McCarthy, JJ., concur.
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5016

AN ACT

To extend the water service contract for the

Missouri Basin Program, Nebraska.Ainsworth Unit, Sandhills Division, Pick-Sloan

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5016

AN ACT

To extend the water service contract for the Ainsworth Unit,

Sandhills Division, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program,

Nebraska.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 5016 EH

1 SECTION 1. AINSWORTH UNIT, SANDHILLS DIVISION, PICK2 SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN PROGRAM.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior shall

4 extend for the period described in subsection (b) the water

5 service contract for the Ainsworth Unit, Sandhills Divi6 sion, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, Nebraska, con7 sisting of—

8 (1) the water service contract entered into by

9 the Secretary of the Interior under—

10 (A) section 9(e) of the Reclamation Project

11 Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h(e));

12 (B) section 9(c) of the Act of December

13 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 887, chapter 665);

14 (C) the Act of August 21, 1954 (68 Stat.

15 757, chapter 781); and

16 (D) the Act of May 18, 1956 (70 Stat.

17 160, chapter 285); and

18 (2) the water service contract for the set project

19 located in Cherry, Brown, and Rock Counties, Ne20 braska, for the use of a part of the waters of the

21 Snake River, a tributary of the Niobrara River.

22 (b) PERIOD OF EXTENSION.—The water service con23 tract described in subsection (a) shall be extended for 4

24 years after the date on which the contract expires under
3

•HR 5016 EH

1 the water service contract and law in existence before the

2 date of enactment of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives September 28,

2004.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated January 16,
2003 included in Form 10-K/A of Clicksoftware Ltd. for the year ended December
31, 2001 into Registration Statement Number 333-42000 on Form S-8 of
Clicksoftware Ltd.


/s/ Brightman Almagor & Co.

Brightman Almagor & Co.
Certified Public Accountants
A member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

Tel Aviv, Israel
January 23, 2003



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-K ClickSoftware Technologies Ltd.                                     Page 78
EX-10.24.2



 Exhibit 10.24.2 

 
 



 
 26 November 2012 
 To: NATIONAL CINEMEDIA, LLC 
 Attn: David Oddo 

E Mail Address: DAVID.ODDO@NCM.COM 

CANCELLATION of Transaction Ref. No. HR6K9 (the “Original Transaction”). 
 THIS CONFIRMATION AMENDS AND RESTATES IN ITS ENTIRETY THE PREVIOUS CONFIRMATION FOR THIS TRANSACTION. 
 Re: USD 137,500,000 (amended to USD 56,250,000.00 as of 27 April 2012) transaction entered into between MORGAN STANLEY CAPITAL SERVICES LLC (‘Party A’) and NATIONAL CINEMEDIA, LLC
(‘Party B’) with a Trade Date of 2 March 2007 and maturing on 13 February 2015 
 Dear Sir or Madam: 

The purpose of this letter (this “Confirmation”) is to confirm the terms on which it has been agreed to cancel the Original Transaction. Such
cancellation constitutes a “Transaction” under the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement dated as of 2 March 2007 between Party A and Party B (the “Agreement”) and this Confirmation constitutes a “Confirmation” as referred to
in, and supplements, forms part of, and is subject to, the Agreement. 
 Accordingly, with effect from 26 November 2012 (the
“Effective Date”) the Original Transaction shall be cancelled, and Party A MORGAN STANLEY CAPITAL SERVICES LLC and Party B shall each be released and discharged from their respective rights and obligations thereunder; provided however,
that such release and discharge shall not affect any rights, liabilities or obligations of either party with respect to payments or other obligations due and payable or due to be performed on or prior to the Effective Date and all such payments and
obligations shall be paid or performed by the relevant party in accordance with the terms of the Original Transaction as in effect prior to the Effective Date. 
  

			
	Unwind Payment:        	  	Further, in consideration for the cancellation of the Transaction NATIONAL CINEMEDIA, LLC shall pay to MORGAN STANLEY CAPITAL SERVICES LLC the amount of USD 6,339,600.00 for value
26 November 2012

 Other Provisions: 
 None 







  
 



 
 Confirmation: 
 Please confirm that the foregoing correctly sets forth the terms of our agreement by executing a copy of this Confirmation, our Reference No. HR6K9, and returning it to us by sending to us a facsimile
substantially similar to this facsimile which sets forth the material terms of the Transaction to which this Confirmation relates and indicates agreement to those terms. 
 We are delighted to have executed this Transaction with you and look forward to working with you again. 
  

			
	 Yours sincerely,
 MORGAN STANLEY CAPITAL SERVICES LLC

		
	By:	 	 /s/ David Flowerdew

	Name: David Flowerdew
	Title: Vice President
	
	Confirmed as of the date first written above:
	
	NATIONAL CINEMEDIA, LLC
	By: National Cinemedia, Inc., its manager
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Gary W. Ferrera

	Name: Gary W. Ferrera
	Title: EVP/CFO
NEE-12.31.2012 Ex 10.ww






Exhibit 10(ww)












October 12, 2012
Board of Directors
NextEra Energy, Inc.
700 Universe Boulevard
Juno Beach, FL 33408


Re:  409A Amendment to Amended and Restated Employment Letter


Ladies and Gentlemen:


I am writing to you in connection with an amendment, to be effective on the date hereof, to the Amended and Restated Employment Letter dated December 10, 2009 and amended as of March 16, 2012 (the “Employment Letter”) between me and NextEra Energy, Inc. (the “Corporation”).  This letter agreement shall be referred to as the “409A Amendment.”  Capitalized terms not specifically defined in this 409A Amendment shall have the meaning set forth in the Employment Letter.


In accordance with Section 4.e.(ii) of the Employment Letter, which provides that the Employment Letter shall be subject to amendment in such manner as the Corporation and I shall reasonably deem necessary or appropriate to effect compliance with Section 409A and the regulations thereunder, and Section 15 thereof, which requires an amendment to the Employment Letter to be set forth in a writing, the Employment Letter is hereby amended by adding the following sentence at the end of Section 10 thereof: 


“If you are able to time the delivery of the release of claims described in this Section 10 such that payments that are treated as deferred compensation under Section 409A either would be paid in the then current calendar year or the calendar year following your termination of employment, then, notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Letter Agreement, the affected payments instead shall automatically and mandatorily be paid in the calendar year following the calendar year in which your termination of employment occurs.”


Except as expressly amended hereby, the Employment Letter in effect immediately before the effective date of this 409A Amendment will remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms.  References to the Employment Letter in the letter agreement dated March 16, 2012 between me and the Corporation will mean the Employment Letter as amended by this 409A Amendment.  











This 409A Amendment will be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the law of the State of Florida, without reference to rules relating to conflicts of law.




	
				
	Very truly yours,
	 
	 
	Accepted and Agreed:

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	NEXTERA ENERGY, INC.

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	LEWIS HAY, III
	 
	 
	 

	Lewis Hay, III
	 
	By:
	J. BRIAN FERGUSON

	 
	 
	 
	J. Brian Ferguson

	 
	 
	 
	Chairman, Compensation Committee
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 56
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 2 of 9 PageID: 57
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 3 of 9 PageID: 58
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 4 of 9 PageID: 59
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 5 of 9 PageID: 60
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 6 of 9 PageID: 61
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 7 of 9 PageID: 62
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 8 of 9 PageID: 63
Case 3:11-cv-01821-PGS-TJB Document 12 Filed 10/03/11 Page 9 of 9 PageID: 64
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF THE

PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Richard Reincke, the CEO and CFO of GWS Technologies, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of GWS Technologies, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of GWS Technologies, Inc.



|                      |  |                                                
|--------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------
|Date:   June 22, 2009 |  | /s/ RICHARD REINCKE                            
|                      |  | Richard Reincke                                
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer/Chief Financial Officer
|                      |  |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7707

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAVID LEE THOMAS, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at 

Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:07-cr-00419-TDS-1; 1:16-cv00857-TDS-JLW)

Submitted: April 20, 2017 Decided: April 24, 2017

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Lee Thomas, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United

States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

David Lee Thomas, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on 

his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice 

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable 

jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on 

procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a 

constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Thomas 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 this court and argument 

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00108-CV

Ally Financial, Inc.

v.

Sandra Gutierrez and Homeward 

Residential

§

§

§

§

From the 67th District Court

of Tarrant County (67-260174-12)

January 23, 2014

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that appellant Ally Financial, Inc. shall pay all costs of 

this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

/s/ Lee Gabriel

By _________________________________

 Justice Lee Gabriel
Consumer Price Index, Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 2017 

Consumer Price Index: Changes in Seasonal Adjustment Status for 2017

These items are changing to Seasonally Adjusted:

Item code Title

CUUR0000SERF02

CWUR0000SERF02 

Admissions

CUUR0000SEGD05

CWUR0000SEGD05 

Financial services

CUUR0000SEHJ

CWUR0000SEHJ 

Furniture and bedding

CUUR0000SEEC01

CWUR0000SEEC01 

Postage

CUUR0000SERC

CWUR0000SERC 

Sporting goods

CUUR0000SS68023 Tax return preparation and other fees

 
Consumer Price Index, Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 2017 

These items are changing to Not Seasonally Adjusted:

Item code Title

CUUR0000SERA05 

CWUR0000SERA05 

Audio equipment

CUUR0000SEGD

CWUR0000SEGD 

Miscellaneous personal services 

CUUR0000SEFP02 

CWUR0000SEFP02 

Other beverage material including tea

CUUR0000SETF03 

CWUR0000SETF03

Parking and other fees

CUUR0000SEFF 

CWUR0000SEFF 

Poultry

CUUR0000SEMC04

CWUR0000SEMC04 

Services by other medical professionals
# Presidential Determination Under Section 402 (c)(2)(A) of the Trade Act of 1974—Republic of Belarus

# Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Pursuant to section 402(c)(2)(A)of the Trade Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-618), as amended (the “Act”), I determine that a waiver by Executive Order of the application of subsections (a) and (b) of section 402 of the Act with respect to Belarus will substantially promote the objectives of section 402.

                    You are authorized and directed to transmit this determination to the Congress and to publish it in the                     *Federal Register*.                

[FR Doc. E9-16348

Billing code 4710-10-P
S05A1872.

#### NGUYEN v. THE STATE.

(621 SE2d 463)

Decided October 24, 2005

Reconsideration denied November 21, 2005.

An C. Nguyen, *pro se.*

*Jewell C. Scott, District Attorney, Billy J. Dixon, Assistant District Attorney, Thurbert E. Baker, Attorney General,*for appellee.

Thompson, Justice.

An C. Nguyen appeals from an order of the trial court dismissing his motion to withdraw a guilty plea. We affirm.

In March 1998, Nguyen pled guilty to felony murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment; other counts of the indictment were nolle prossed. In June 2005, outside the term of court in which the plea was entered, Nguyen filed a motion to withdraw the plea, which the trial court dismissed. He appeals from that order.

The trial court’s authority to grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea ends after the expiration of the term of court in which the plea was entered. *Downs v. State,*270 Ga. 310 (509 SE2d 40) (1998). “It is well established that after the expiration of the term and of the time for filing an appeal from the conviction, the only remedy available to the defendant for withdrawing a plea is through habeas corpus proceedings. [Cit.]” (Punctuation omitted.) Id. It follows that the trial court properly dismissed Nguyen’s motion to withdraw his plea.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
Exhibit 13.1



CEO SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



---



PSi TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS, INC.



This
certification is provided to PSi Technologies Holdings, Inc. (the Issuer) in connection with the preparation of the annual report on Form 20-F (the Form 20-F) for the period ended December 31, 2004
of Issuer.



I, Arthur J. Young, Jr., the Chief Executive Officer of Issuer
certify that:



(1) To the best of my knowledge, after
reasonable investigation:



(i) the Form 20-F
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(ii) the information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Issuer.



(2) I have reviewed the contents of
this certificate with the Chief Financial Officer of Issuer.



Dated: July 15, 2005.



/s/    ARTHUR J. YOUNG,
JR.Name: Arthur J. Young, Jr.Title: Chief Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 19-0134

_________________

STATE OF MONTANA,

 Plaintiff and Appellee,

 v.

JESSIE AARON SCHULZ,

 Defendant and Appellant.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to the Court sitting en banc. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Jason T. Marks, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 20 2021

01/20/2021

Case Number: DA 19-0134
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 Green Clover Luck  Corporation
on Form  10-KSB for the  period  ending  December  31,  2003,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Daniel
L.  Hodges,  President 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/ Daniel L. Hodges
Daniel L. Hodges
President, Director
(Principal Executive Officer)


April 19, 2004


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.
Exhibit 32.1


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                           AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Grace 5,
Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ending August 31, 2006, I, Virginia K.
Sourlis, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of 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, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:

      1. Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending August 31,
2006, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ending August 31, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  October 12, 2006

Grace 5, Inc.

By: /s/ Virginia K. Sourlis
    -----------------------
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.14

 

WATTS WATER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

 

Non-Employee Director Compensation

 

The annual compensation payable by Watts Water Technologies, Inc. to non-employee Directors as determined by the Board of Directors of the Corporation on July 31, 2012 is as follows:

 

·      $60,000 annual retainer;

 

·                  Annual grant of stock with a fair market value on the date of grant equal to $90,000;

 

·                  The Chairman of the Board shall receive an additional annual retainer of $40,000;

 

·                  The Chairman of the Audit Committee shall receive an additional annual retainer of $17,500;

 

·                  The Chairman of the Compensation Committee shall receive an additional annual retainer of $12,500;

 

·                  The Chairman of the and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee shall receive an additional annual retainer of $5,000; and

 

·                  There shall be no additional compensation paid for participation in Board or committee meetings.