alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Filed 1/27/22 P. v. Martinez CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for 

publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication

or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

MAURICIO MARTINEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

 D079004

 (Super. Ct. No. SCD272693)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, 

Joseph P. Brannigan, Judge. Affirmed. 

Jay Temple, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant 

and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. 

This is an appeal from the denial of a motion to dismiss under Penal 

Code1 section 1203.42. The trial court found Mauricio Martinez ineligible for 

relief under the statute and denied the motion. We will find the record on 

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2

appeal does not present any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. (People v.

Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).)

In 2017, Martinez pleaded guilty to assault with force likely to produce 

great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)). The court sentenced Martinez to 

three years on probation. 

In 2019, the court revoked probation and sentenced Martinez to a twoyear term in prison. 

In 2021, Martinez filed a petition for dismissal of his conviction under 

section 1203.42. Following a hearing with Martinez present, the court found 

Martinez was not eligible for relief and denied the petition. 

Martinez filed a notice of appeal. 

Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 

Cal.3d 436, indicating counsel he has not been able to identify any arguable 

issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to review the record for 

error as mandated by Wende. We offered Martinez the opportunity to file his 

own brief on appeal, but he has not responded.

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks 

the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and 

in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel 

has identified the following possible issues that were considered in evaluating 

the potential merits of this appeal.

1. Whether the trial court analyzed the petition under section 1203. 4 

rather than section 1203.42.

2. Whether the trial court erred in denying Martinez’s petition for 

dismissal under section 1203.4.
3

We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders. 

We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. 

Competent counsel has represented Martinez on this appeal.

DISPOSITION

The order denying Martinez’s petition to dismiss under section 1203.42 

is affirmed.

HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

AARON, J.

DATO, J.
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 Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-38,083, TA-W-38,083A]

                    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor issued a Notice of Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on December 19, 2000, applicable to workers of Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, Jessop Plate Mill, Jessop O&T, Washington Flat Roll (formerly Washington Steel Corporation), Washington, Pennsylvania and Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, Houston, Texas. The notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 11, 2001 (66 FR 2451).                

At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers produce stainless steel, including slab, coil and plate as well as tool steel. New findings show that there was a previous certification, TA-W-34,026 and TA-W-34,026A, issued on January 14, 1998, for workers of the subject firm who were engaged in employment related to the production of stainless steel products. That certification expired January 14, 2000. To avoid an overlap in worker group coverage, the certification is being amended to change the impact date from August 30, 1999 to January 15, 2000, for workers of the subject firm.

The amended notice applicable to TA-W-38,083 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, Jessop Plant Mill, Jessop O&T and Washington Flat Roll (formerly Washington Steel Corporation), Washington, Pennsylvania and Houston, Pennsylvania who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after January 15, 2000 through December 19, 2002 are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of January, 2001.

Linda G. Poole,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 01-3294  Filed 2-7-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
exv10w5



 





EXHIBIT 10.5



SECOND AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




     WHEREAS, on the 28th day of April 2005 (the “Effective Date”) PMC Commercial Trust (the
“Company”) and Ron Dekelbaum (“Employee”) executed an Employment Agreement (the “Agreement”).



     WHEREAS, the Company and Employee wish to amend and extend the term of the Agreement through
October 31, 2007; and



     WHEREAS, in consideration of the foregoing premises, the mutual agreements contained herein
and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged, the terms and conditions of the Agreement including the severance provisions provided
in paragraph 5 are hereby extended through October 31, 2007; and



     WHEREAS, all other terms and conditions pursuant to the Agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment as of July 6, 2006.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	EMPLOYEE:	 	PMC COMMERCIAL TRUST
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/Ron H. Dekelbaum
	 	By:
	 	/s/ Jan F. Salit	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Ron H. Dekelbaum
	 	Name:
	 	Jan F. Salit	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Title:
	 	Executive Vice President	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	Date:
	 	July 6, 2006	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 





PAGE 1
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 23, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 135149(30) Marilyn Kelly
 

Maura D. Corrigan
 

Robert P. Young, Jr.
 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman,

Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 135149 

 COA: 279017 
 Wayne CC: 05-003228

ALEXANDER ACEVAL,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s March 19, 

2008 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

d0616 

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 23, 2008 

 Clerk
#### In re: Jason J. SMITH-BEY, Petitioner.

No. 10-1980.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 21, 2010.

Decided: Jan. 3, 2011.

Jason J. Smith-Bey, Petitioner Pro Se.

Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jason J. Smith-Bey petitions for a writ of mandamus, asking this court to order the district court to direct service of his civil rights complaint on the defendants named therein. Our review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court directed service of process on September 20, 2010, and that service was effectuated shortly thereafter. Accordingly, because the district court has taken the action Smith-Bey seeks, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2023-1886

_____________________________

JOSHUA WALTER FEAGLE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

David W. Fina, Judge.

May 31, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

OSTERHAUS, C.J., and ROWE and LONG, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Joshua Walter Feagle, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE EMPLOYMENT AND NONCOMPETITION AGREEMENT
 rd
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 NOW, THEREFORE
 1.
    
    Effective on the date hereof, the Agreement is amended as follows:
    Additional Payment Terms Payments Specified Employee Interest Payment Delayed
Payment Delayed Payment
Date
 If the Payments are required to be delayed for the six-month period as described herein,
then the Company (or its successor) shall, no later than the Executives Termination Date,
transfer to an irrevocable rabbi trust (to the extent not prohibited by Code Section 409A)
established in the name and for the benefit of the Executive an undiscounted




---



##### 



2.
    
    In all other respects, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
 3.
    
    This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and
all of which shall together constitute one and the same instrument.
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 TechTeam Global, Inc.By:
    /s/ Michael SosinTitle: Corporate Vice President, General Counsel/s/ Gary J. CotshottGary J. Cotshott 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          50,981
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      28,837,966
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,173,342
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,394,739
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          965,158
<BONDS>                                     15,664,204
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,503,616
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,394,739
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               860,151
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               395,467
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             427,864
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,151,017)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,151,017)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,151,017)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (44.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed 

September 1, 2022.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00524-CR

EX PARTE JESUS MARTIN RUVALCABA

On Appeal from the 182nd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1776470

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Jesus Martin Ruvalcaba, has signed and filed a motion for 

voluntary dismissal of his appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Because this court has 

not delivered an opinion, we grant appellant’s request.

We dismiss the appeal. We direct the clerk of the court to issue the mandate 

of the court immediately. See Tex. R. App. P. 2.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot, and Zimmerer.

Do Not Publish – Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
June 22, 1998



Trendview Management Inc.
591 Camino de la Reina
Suite 316
San Deigo, California 93208-3105

Attention:  Mr. Clark Smith

         Re:      Management Agreement Renewal
                  Smith Barney Diversified Futures Fund L.P.

Dear Mr. Smith:

We are  writing  with  respect  to  your  management  agreement  concerning  the
commodity pool to which reference is made above (the "Management Agreement"). We
would like to extend the term of the Management  Agreement through June 30, 1999
and make the attached  modification on Rider 1. Per our recent correspondence to
you, the current allocation is 50% to the Diversified  trading system and 50% to
the Currency trading system.  All other  provisions of the Management  Agreement
will remain unchanged.

Please indicate your agreement to and acceptance of this modification by signing
one copy of this letter and returning it to the attention of Mr. Daniel Dantuono
at the address above or fax to 212-723-8985.  If you have any questions I can be
reached at 212-723-5416.

Very truly yours,

SMITH BARNEY FUTURES MANAGEMENT INC.



By:
         Daniel A. Dantuono
         Chief Financial Officer,
         Director & Treasurer

AGREED AND ACCEPTED

TRENDVIEW MANAGEMENT INC.

By:

Print Name:

DAD/sr
**OFFICEOFTHEATTORNEYGENERALOFTEXAS AUSTIN**  **GROVER SELLERS**  **A?,ORWLY** **GENLR*L**
grrr. B. B. Sap&J **ItrQauttre dxm3tary**  Teacher Betirameot L‘yetcinof Texas Austin, Texam **Dear me.**  **Sapp:** opinion MO.O-6619 He: Bllglbillty OSoar for Teacher **Ratlro** one State De

nlon requmstiraadlng been prmmst.66 our interpretation

eslth, will the 

### sliglblllty of these mmr Hetirenant **benefit6 be**  **affeoted?**

“8. Utapa teaoher who la on a leave of abeence rron a aahool, aridwho **recslvcrs** ruu pay rrom said aohool, be allowed to mukedeposltu with the Teaoher Hetlmnent System each month and be considered an active **nfmber?***

### 85

Stabsection (2) of &action 1, aticla liPaZ-1,Vernon'% Railsed Civil dtat:ite%, reardsaa ioliowaz

**siub880ti0n** (3) 0r the aha mti0n I% 448~OUMB:

“(1) *%eaohas~ wall 3wm a perasn employed on a tuil the, ro@ulns ualnry baair by board% of aommi oohool dkstrloto, board% of iodep%Admt %%hool di%trlot%, o0uuty ooho01 **boarda,** l?otlroaant Board of ?ru%tt%%, Stat% **Beard** Of iMw&IOn and Sate lkpmtmnt OS i;dueatloa,boerdr of r%gsnt% of oall%jg%aand unlrersitles, an6 **any other**  leglAy sowtltuted borrd **or** aaeACy of %n eduocrtlonel l%stitutlOn or orgpniacatton %~pport%d wholly 

### or partly by thr 5x&o. In ail ~a%08of doubt, the Iirtirrwm **Board** of i”ru%tb%%her&nrtt%r drtlnad, ehall dster-sine whether a perma in u te ohm 

### 8%h%iiB8dLnthis ILOt. **A teziohar**  **ebsll mean** **8** per8on **render** illg ecuvlee to organized pubU% %4naatlon in psoiem%loAal arid bu%Ineo%m%ntIai%tr~tlon %nd%upervlelon end ln lnotruetlon, la **public** rehooia %n dofl.medIn Subseotion (8) of thi% 3Mtbn. f3Ub%#OtIOO (4) Of tf;%8&i@ iMOtiOn 1S %% follow%:

“(a) ‘~loym’* 8hall naan the, Ltete of ‘imxaaaad lmy 0r Ito u6oigac;ted egrnta or *%ncis% with r%%pm%lbillty urrdautimrity ,for publla edueatfon, bush a%the comwi *nd 

# cindependbnt echo01 boards, the board4 of regent4 of

Stats oollege4 and universitiee, the 4ounty s0h001 boards, or any othsr egsncg of end within the stat4 by **rhioh** a person may b4 eaployed for eervioe in public education.”

You are advlesd that, in our opinion, the ellgibilitp **of** menssbera

for Teacher Hetirenent er4 not afieoted by the change in **4Up8RiSiO~3** rroa th4 Depsrtolent or Eduoation to the Department of Health. Both dspartmeotr er4 aganciee OSth4 **State,** by whloh pereonr mayb4 enployed ior e4rvloe in publio eduoetlon. **YOUr** attention ia directed to **thm** following language found In subeeotlon (31, 8upra: "In all oases 02 doubt, th4 Retiremnt Board of Trustees * * * ahall dateraim whether a person is a teaoher a6 defined in this Act.w

Your second question la enuwsred in ths negetlve. No sohool district is authorized by law to pay a teaaher full pay unlsse the teeoher render4 4om4 **~41~144** to the sohool. A teacher on leav4 02 abeeno4 far th4 4nttr4 sohaol year is not r4nderlng **44rvlo4** to h4r employer and ehoold not be allowed to makedeposit4 with the TeaaherU Betiremnt Syet4a.
**vi4** trust that **w4** hev4 ratletactorily en4wemd your inquiry. Yours very truly

, 1945
, u By ,lfii&L ‘FxAs C. F. Gibson A44ietant
Exhibit 21
**SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT**
1. Equity Marketing Hong Kong, Ltd., a Delaware corporation (“EMHK”)
2. Corinthian Marketing, Inc., a Delaware corporation
3. Logistix Limited, a United Kingdom corporation (“Logistix”) (a subsidiary of EMAK Europe)
4. Johnson Grossfield, Inc., a Delaware corporation
5. Equity Marketing, Inc., a Delaware corporation
6. Upshot, Inc., a Delaware corporation
7. SCI Promotion, Inc., a Delaware corporation
8. Logistix, Inc., a Delaware corporation
9. Pop Rocket, Inc., a Delaware corporation
10. EMAK Worldwide Service Corp., a Delaware corporation
11. EMAK Europe Holdings Limited, a United Kingdom corporation (“EMAK Europe”)
12. EMAK Europe Services Limited, a United Kingdom corporation (a subsidiary of EMAK Europe)
13. EMAK Hong Kong Limited, a Hong Kong company (a subsidiary of EMHK)
14. EMAK China Limited, a Hong Kong company (a subsidiary of EMHK)
15. Virtual Video Company Limited, a United Kingdom company (a subsidiary of Logistix)
16. EMAK Asia Holding Company Limited, a Hong Kong company (a subsidiary of EMHK)
17. Megaprint Group Limited, a United Kingdom company (“MGL”)(a subsidiary of EMAK Europe)
18. Megaprint Limited, a United Kingdom company (a subsidiary of MGL)
19. Megapromotions (U.K.) Limited, a United Kingdom company (a subsidiary of MGL)
20. Megapromotions Beheer BV, a Dutch company (“MBBV”)(a subsidiary of MGL)
21. Megapromotions BV, a Dutch company (a subsidiary of MBBV)
22. Mint Holland BV, a Dutch company (a subsidiary of MBBV)
23. Megapromotions GmbH, a German company (a subsidiary of MBBV)
24. Promomega EURL, a French company (a subsidiary of MBBV)
25. Megapromotions Asia, Ltd., a Hong Kong company (a subsidiary of MGL)
26. Prodesign Marketing Limited, a Northern Ireland company (a subsidiary of EMAK Europe)
EXHIBIT
23





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We have
issued our report dated March 30, 2010, accompanying the consolidated financial
statements of Cadus Corporation and subsidiary included in the Annual Report of
Cadus Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009. We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration
Statements of Cadus Corporation on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-21871, effective
February 14, 1997, and File No. 333-58151, effective June 30,
1998).





/s/ HOLTZ
RUBENSTEIN REMINICK LLP





New York,
New York


March 30,
2010
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 


Name of Corporation                                   State of Incorporation
-------------------                                   -----------------------
<S>                                                   <C> 
Clearwater Acquisition Corporation                          Delaware
Lafayette Acquisition Corporation                           Delaware
Realty Acquisition Corporation                              Delaware
SPIALA Corporation                                          Delaware
SPIANTONIO, Inc.                                            Delaware
SPIAPT, Inc.                                                Alabama
SPIAPTLA, Inc.                                              Delaware
SPIBILE, Inc.                                               Alabama
SPICLIFF, Inc.                                              Delaware
SPICOM, Inc.                                                Alabama
SPICOMLA, Inc.                                              Delaware
SPIDAY, Inc.                                                Delaware
SPIDELA, Inc.                                               Delaware
SPILAF, Inc.                                                Alabama
SPILAKE, Inc.                                               Delaware
SPILAN, Inc.                                                Delaware
SPILOT, Inc.                                                Alabama
SPIMALL, Inc.                                               Alabama
SPIMALLA, Inc.                                              Delaware
SPINAP, Inc.                                                Delaware
SPINELLON, Inc.                                             Delaware
SPINO, Inc.                                                 Delaware
SPIPAL, Inc.                                                Delaware
SPIPOWER, Inc.                                              Alabama
SPITON, Inc.                                                Alabama
SPITOWN, Inc.                                               Delaware
SPIWACHEE, Inc.                                             Delaware
SPIWARD, Inc.                                               Delaware
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                 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 on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2005 of EarthShell Corporation (the "Company") as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, D.
Scott Houston, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to my best knowledge:

         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.


                                            /s/ D. SCOTT HOUSTON
                                            -----------------------------
                                            D. Scott Houston
                                            Chief Financial
                                            Officer Date: March 31, 2006