text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
Appeal from the Criminal Court of Cook County; the Hon. JOHN
GUTKNECHT, Judge, presiding. Affirmed.
Rape. *fn1
After a bench trial, defendant was found guilty and sentenced to a term of twenty years.
POINTS RAISED ON APPEAL *fn2
(1) The evidence did not establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
(2) A variance between the indictment and the evidence adduced requires reversal.
Testimony of State Witnesses
Catherine Wells
On the 13th of March, 1961, between 10:30 and 11:00 p.m., while waiting for a bus on the corner of Kedzie and Douglas Streets in Chicago, she was grabbed around the throat from behind, pulled backwards into a passageway below the bus stop, and cautioned not to "holler." Once in the passageway she observed "two other boys" in addition to her assailant. The three took her pocketbook and change, and demanded to know her name. Then, on signal, a "car was brought up into the alley, and I was pulled out of this alley and pushed in this car." A total of six boys were in the car as it proceeded out of the alley. Defendant was one of the six occupants. She informed her captors that she was forty years of age, married, four and a half months pregnant and the mother of sons as old as they were, but "they told me they didn't want to hear this story." When the car reached a dead-end alley all of the boys but the original assailant, Sam Jones, left the car. Jones ordered her to slide down on the seat of the car and he engaged in an act of sexual intercourse with her. It was then decided by the boys that this was not a desirable location and, after some debate, all of them returned to the car and they proceeded to another location. At this latter destination, Mrs. Wells was pulled from the car by her clothing and arm, called a bad name, and led by Jones down a passageway to a dimly lit basement. In the basement there took place eight separate acts of intercourse with her by eight different persons. At one point in the ordeal she was asked to drink "peppermint schnapps," but she refused. Defendant was one of those eight attackers. At the conclusion of these attacks, Mrs. Wells was driven to her home by some of the boys. She reported the rapes to her husband, who immediately summoned the police. Approximately a week or eight days after the event, Mrs. Wells was called to the police station to view suspects in a lineup. She there identified some of her attackers, but defendant was not in the lineup.
Jeriel K. Howard
He was the police officer who placed defendant under arrest for sex investigation.
Testimony of Defendant's Witnesses
Sam Jones
The arrangement with Catherine Wells was not forced, as she became friendly when she observed that Jones had ten dollars. She willingly complied with his request that she purchase a half pint of peppermint schnapps and accompany him and his friends to a certain location. There, Jones, Johnnie Walker and Willie Lee Dean had intercourse with Mrs. Wells. Defendant was not there and did not have intercourse with her. On cross-examination, however, Jones admitted that in an oral statement taken in the office of the State's Attorney on March 14, 1961, he had stated that defendant had been among those present at the event in issue and had had intercourse with Mrs. Wells. This statement by Jones was also impeaching of his testimony that no force was exerted on her.
Johnnie Walker
He had intercourse with Catherine Wells at the time and place in question, but it was not against her will. This testimony was also impeached by the introduction into evidence of an earlier statement by Walker in which he indicated that force had been used.
Defendant contends that he was not one of the eight men who participated in the rape of Mrs. Wells. However, testimony of the prosecutrix is to the contrary. She positively identified defendant, first, as one of the men in the automobile which carried her away from the bus stop, and, second, as one of the men who engaged in sexual intercourse with her in the basement. While Sam Jones testified that defendant was not present at the multiple rape episode, this testimony, as indicated, was not only contradicted by Mrs. Wells, but was also impeached by his prior inconsistent statements. Further, the identification testimony is strengthened by the surrounding circumstances, there having been adequate time and sufficient lighting in the basement for prosecutrix to observe the appearance and to determine the identity of the men who raped her. Although uncorroborated by the testimony of other State witnesses, the testimony of the prosecutrix was clear and convincing, and therefore is sufficient to support a conviction. People v. Mack, 25 Ill.2d 416, 420, 185 N.E.2d 154; People v. Walden, 19 Ill.2d 602, 608, 169 N.E.2d 241; People v. Gardner, 61 Ill. App.2d 326, 335, 210 N.E.2d 545.
Defendant also argues that the prosecutrix was a voluntary participant in the acts of intercourse. We think the record establishes the contrary. In the first moments of her ordeal, Mrs. Wells was grabbed around the throat and pulled backwards from her bus stop into an alley, where she was surrounded by three men. She was then "pulled out of this alley and pushed in this car" where she found herself surrounded by six men. Once in the basement she testified that "[t]hey had taken my shoes off, tore my skirt off of me." True, her testimony does not describe active physical resistance at the time Jones had intercourse with her alone in the car, but the fact that five other assailants stood just outside the car must be considered. The same situation existed during the basement assaults where seven other assailants were present at all times in the immediate area. We also find substantiation on the question of involuntariness in the fact of Mrs. Wells' prompt report of the attack to her husband and the police.
We think it reasonable that a forty-year-old woman, pulled off the public sidewalk and thrown into the unfriendly company of six to eight strangers, under all the circumstances of this case, would find her will to resist overcome. People v. Finley, 22 Ill.2d 525, 529, 177 N.E.2d 149. Evidence of the sudden abduction and aggressive method in which Mrs. Wells was taken from street to alley to car to basement by her several assailants indicates that her active resistance would have been futile and was therefore unnecessary to sustain the conviction. People v. Faulisi, 25 Ill.2d 457, 461, 185 N.E.2d 211. In this context, we cannot say that the evidence is so improbable or unsatisfactory as to leave a reasonable doubt as to defendant's guilt. People v. Henson, 29 Ill.2d 210, 214, 193 N.E.2d 777.
Defendant's contention of a fatal variance in dates between the indictment and the proof adduced is not well founded. It is true that the date of the offense as recited in the indictment was March 7, 1961, and the prosecutrix was asked to relate what occurred on March 13, 1961. However, the indictment and the evidence move into accord later in Mrs. Wells' testimony where she states that she was called to the police station on the 13th or 14th of March to identify her attackers, and that this was "[a] week or eight days" after the rape. Further, direct examination by defense counsel of Sam Jones and Johnnie Walker clearly fixes the night of the rape at March 7, 1961, even though the date of March 2, 1961, appears on cross-examination of Jones.
[4-6] While the record we have before us does indicate that defendant was under a separate indictment *fn3 for rape committed on March 12, 1961, as well as the March 7, 1961 rape, the record also discloses that Catherine Wells was involved only in the rapes perpetrated on March 7, 1961. The State's case, including the positive identification of defendant, is based on testimony of the complaining witness, and her testimony necessarily relates to the enormities committed against her, without regard to any other crimes allegedly committed by defendant involving other victim(s). Even if there were a clear variance as to time between the indictment and the evidence, reversal would not be required. As was stated in People v. Schmidt, 10 Ill.2d 221, 227-228, 139 N.E.2d 726:
Every indictment must allege the commission of the offense on a certain date prior to the return of the indictment, which must be within the time fixed by law for the prosecution of the offense. It is not necessary, however, to prove the precise date as alleged unless the allegation of a special time is an essential ingredient of the crime or the running of the statute of limitation is involved. A slight variance as to the dates is immaterial. . . .
See, also, People v. Rohde, 403 Ill. 41, 44, 85 N.E.2d 24. The date is not an "essential ingredient" of the crime of rape and there is no limitation problem in the instant case.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
DRUCKER and McCORMICK, JJ., concur.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
decided: December 4, 1980.
JOHN M. FANELLY, PETITIONERv.COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT
Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of John M. Fanelly, No. B-164949.
Leon A. Mankowski, for petitioner.
William J. Kennedy, Assistant Attorney General, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel and Harvey Bartle, III, Acting Attorney General, for respondent.
Judges Mencer, Craig and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Williams, Jr.
[ 55 Pa. Commw. Page 111]
This is the appeal of John M. Fanelly (appellant) from an Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which affirmed a Referee's decision denying benefits to the appellant for willful misconduct under Section 402(e) of the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Law (Act).*fn1
Appellant Fanelly was employed by Acorn Associates as Director of Marketing. As of June, 1978, he had accrued six weeks vacation time. Approximately April, 1978, he was advised by his supervisor that he should arrange to use his accrued time to avoid forfeiting it. The possibility of forfeiture arose because of expected changes in the company's ownership.
[ 55 Pa. Commw. Page 112]
On June 19, 1978, appellant began his vacation. Two weeks prior to that date he had informed his supervisor that he planned to use all of his vacation time; but he had failed to indicate the specific period of time during which he expected to be absent from work. The supervisor testified that she was not made aware of appellant's intended period of vacation until the Friday before that period began, which constituted three days advance notice. It was Acorn's policy that vacation time must be approved by the company at least two weeks in advance.
Fanelly returned to work on June 22, 1978, for a previously-scheduled meeting. The meeting was attended by the appellant, his supervisor, and the owner of Acorn Associates, George Welsh. At the meeting the appellant's vacation was discussed. The record is confusing as to what was resolved at this meeting; it is the employer's position that Fanelly was informed that his vacation had not been approved in advance as required by standing policy. The employer also maintains that Welsh suggested to the appellant that he revise his vacation plans to allow for the responsibilities of his position as Acorn's Director of Marketing. Fanelly refused to do so.
Immediately following this meeting, Fanelly received a letter from his supervisor notifying him that he had been terminated because of his attitude and behavior during the dispute over his vacation. Thereafter he applied for Unemployment Compensation benefits and his application was denied by the Bureau of Employment Security (Bureau) on the grounds of willful misconduct. He appealed the Bureau's decision and it was upheld by a Referee after a hearing. Fanelly appealed the Referee's decision to the Board, which affirmed the Referee. Appellant brings this appeal from the Board's Order affirming the Referee's decision.
[ 55 Pa. Commw. Page 113]
It is well established that taking an unauthorized vacation when directed not to do so constitutes willful misconduct under Section 402(e) of the Act. McAlister v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 39 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 376, 395 A.2d 660 (1978). This Court has consistently so held when confronted with this issue. McAlister, supra; Adams v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 30 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 500, 373 A.2d 1383 (1977); Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Devlin, 20 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 162, 341 A.2d 221 (1975).
The record before us clearly supports the Board's finding that Fanelly took his vacation without proper authorization, which constitutes willful misconduct. Both the employer and the appellant testified that the appellant was aware of his obligation to provide two weeks advance notice before taking a vacation. The appellant failed to do this. Additional testimony by his supervisor establishes that Fanelly also failed to make arrangements to cover his duties during his absence, which further violated known company policy.
Our scope of review in these matters is strictly defined. This Court is limited to determining whether the Board's findings of fact are consistent with each other, and with the Board's conclusions of law and its Order; and whether the findings can be sustained without a capricious disregard of competent evidence. Sweigart v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 47 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 421, 408 A.2d 561 (1979). We are further bound to give to the party who prevailed below the benefit of any inferences which can reasonably be drawn from the evidence. Barnett v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 47 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 360, 408 A.2d 195 (1979).
[ 55 Pa. Commw. Page 114]
Applying the above standard of review to the record before us, we conclude that the sole issue before this Court is whether the Board's findings are supported by substantial evidence. On that record, we hold that the Board's findings are clearly supported by the evidence; and we therefore affirm the Board's Order denying benefits to the appellant.
And Now, the 4th day of December, 1980, the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, dated March 19, 1979, at Decision No. B-164949, is affirmed.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Is this attraction exciting, unusual, or risky to visit?
Does this attraction require above average amounts of physical activity (long walks, climbs, stairs or hikes)?
Does this attraction have good scenic or skyline views?
Is this attraction a "must-see" location?
Does this attraction provide visitors with a taste of the local culture?
Is this an outdoor attraction or activity?
Is this attraction popular with tourists?
Would this be a good sunny day activity?
Is this attraction suitable for all ages?
Is this attraction pet friendly?
Thanks for helping!
A popular waterfall attraction.
Lots of water when we visited since it has been raining. But it made the water muddy. Has several spaces for parking. Nice fall to just visit if in the area but don't suggest...
read more
Lots of water when we visited since it has been raining. But it made the water muddy. Has several spaces for parking. Nice fall to just visit if in the area but don't suggest driving 30 min or more to see it.
I was so excited to see this, but we picked the wrong day!! Our day trip got cancelled due to flash flooding and it shows in these falls!!! They were brown and muddy and the whole bottom of the falls were flooded and covered in debris. Pretty cool to see how much bigger they were, but we will have to...
Drove to see, but also saw on the our helicopter ride. Would recommend the helicopter over driving there. Were there October 2016
The falls are nice, its a ways off the main road and the parking is horrid at the top. Especially if a tour bus is there. But there is not much else to see. It's something to do if you want to get off the beach.
The falls were beautiful but the congestion was very frustrating. Cars were having to turn around one at a time to exit the area. Vendors and wild pigs were complicating the problem. I won't go back.
Please don't miss if you are in Kawaii. Best time is when it rains.
Truly majestic in garden island.
Do not miss seeing this waterfall. It is absolutely gorgeous and breathtaking! We purchased a loaf of homemade banana bread from a lady selling homemade goodies right beside the falls.
Beautiful talks, from a unique vantage point . . . Up close and personal. Extremely limited and awkward parking.
Not a huge waterfall fan, but this one requires ZERO effort and has full disabled access to and at the viewpoint. Viewpoint parking area has cute wild cockrels, hens and chicks to keep the kids amused if they are underwhelmed by "the view".
It is pretty enough to have been filmed, but is not really worth a diversion. That is if you simply go by car, park,and take pictures like we did: most did the same. I imagine if you have time it really would have more impact viewed from below. Pictures from on top looking down are never as appealing as from...
A tour be better to do or just do it on our own?
Can you go into the water at the bottom of the falls?
Hello, do we need to purchase tickets for a tour to see the falls or can we go on our own?
Would like to know about other waterfalls and scenic spots on Kauai
How do you get to the bottom of the falls?
See all questions


text:
You are a fan of creed kong ? Come to discover the best forums creed kong on the internet and share your experience with a community fan of creed kong . You can also build a forum creed kong and create your online discussion.
Free forum : Here you can role play as your favorite characters as well as your own from the Assassin's Creed series! All games and time periods are included in this forum, it is not secluded to a sin
forum, assassin's, #creed, assassins, connor, role, play, your, favorite, characters, well, from, series!, games, time
SINZA- EXOTIC AUTOMATIC Wrist blades, Switchblades, Exotic Weapon Design & Construction
wristblade, hidden, blade, forearm, blades, switchblades, assassin, sinza, wrist, assassins, #creed, altair
This is for the on game AQWolds guild dc members online, we are the brotherhood.
aqworlds, destoyers, #creed, guild, game, aqwolds, members, online, brotherhood
the forums for the assassins creed fanclub
Where Apostolic Christians (Anglicans, Catholics, Othrodox, etc). can fellowship
free, forum, apostolic, christian, where, christians, come, together, chat, conservative, theology, tradition, #creed, members, talk, type, assorted, join, catholic, mary, anglicans, fellowship
Creed Gaming
free, forum, #creed, gaming, contract, wars, begone, games, brotherhood
Free forum : The home of the Creed Clan.
We are Sang Ye! This organization is a hybrid-asian, Hong Kong based, crime syndicate located in San Andreas & Liberty City. This is were we organize & plan our rule
sang, enterprise, organization, hybrid-asian, hong, #kong, based, crime, syndicate, located, andreas, liberty, city, organize
about a donkey, his name is kong
#kong, donkey


text:
How to be the guy women love!
I get a lot of emails from guys who read my articles that say things like...
"I'm sure what you're saying is right, but I don't want to be a jerk or an a**hole to women..."
"I have seen what you're talking about happen all my life, but I'm a 'nice guy' and I want women to like me for me..."
"This doesn't make sense..."
I'd like to address these ideas.
Up until about 5 years ago, I was THE nice guy of nice guys. As a matter of fact, when I first made the decision to learn how to be successful with women, this actually created an obstacle for me.
Let me explain...
Because I believed that "being a nice guy" MUST be the way to success with women, I ACTUALLY COULDN'T EVEN PERCEIVE ANY OTHER WAY.
In other words, I could see a situation where a woman was attracted to a mean, abusive guy and think to myself that either she must be screwed up in the head, or THAT THE GUY MUST BE REALLY NICE TO HER THE REST OF THE TIME.
As you probably know, it's hard to convince a person to believe something when they already have a belief about the topic. The person that you're trying to convince just uses whatever you say to convince themselves that they're actually right... and you're wrong.
Well, I did the exact same thing.
No matter how much evidence I found to the contrary, I still somehow believed that being a "nice" guy, buying women flowers and gifts, taking them out, and generally letting them be in control of the relationship HAD to be the way to attract them.
Well, after continuing along the same path and getting the same results, I
realized something that literally
changed EVERYTHING for me.
I realized that JERKS do, in fact, attract hot women.
Selfish behavior, as unhealthy as this might sound, often makes women feel attracted to you.
Sarcasm, ball busting, playing hard to get, and all kinds of other "illogical" things really do work when it comes to attracting women.
But then I had a dilemma...
I love the idea of being successful with women, but I HATE the idea of mistreating people, being mean to them, lying and misleading, etc.
Deep down, I want to be a good guy.
I decided that there MUST be a way to make this work, and to attract women without being ABUSIVE.
The good news is that THERE IS a way.
But it requires that you put aside your current ideas for just long enough to entertain some new ones.
First, let me say that I believe I've found a way to take the things that JERKS do to attract women and use them WITHOUT THE ABUSE. When you learn to do this, you can really have the best of both worlds... you can be nice to women on your own terms, and give them what they REALLY want, and what REALLY attracts them.
So WHY DO WOMEN BECOME ATTRACTED TO JERKS?
The short answer is that they don't CHOOSE it, it's something that just HAPPENS.
It's an emotional response to certain things.
Women don't CHOOSE to feel the emotion called ATTRACTION for jerks any more than YOU choose to feel the emotion called ATTRACTION for young, beautiful, hardbodied women.
Nature has pre-programmed MEN with a mechanism that works like this:
Well, women have a similar mechanism. But I think that the female version is MORE COMPLEX.
Yes, women do feel attraction for extremely handsome men... but they feel a MUCH STRONGER ATTRACTION for certain PERSONALITY TRAITS and BEHAVIORS than they do for physical looks alone.
So again, the short answer is that it's just something that "happens" inside of a women. She doesn't "choose" it.
So what is it about the "jerk" that creates this powerful, uncontrollable ATTRACTION inside of women?
Let me answer first by telling you what IT'S NOT:
It's NOT the abuse (not usually anyway). I don't believe that women are attracted to that abusive, mean, negative part of the "jerk personality".
I think that jerks JUST HAPPEN to also possess several ATTRACTIVE qualities that are SO POWERFUL that that they literally make women BLIND to the abuse... women will rationalize and excuse the abusive behavior because they are so attracted to these other qualities.
Here's a PARTIAL list of what creates that ATTRACTION:
Of course, there are many more, but this will get us started for this discussion.
The qualities I've listed above, when presented correctly, trigger the natural "attraction mechanism" inside of women.
Jerks have taken natural qualities that are ATTRACTIVE to women a little "too far".
But because they're still there, the qualities trigger the attraction anyway.
So what does this mean to you?
Well, the most important thing is that it means you can still be a good guy and attract women at the same time.
You're probably going to have to learn how to flirt in a different way, become a little more comfortable being challenging to women, etc. But in the end, you'll find that this will get you what you want, and still allow you to treat women well... all on your own terms.
It also means that instead of being the guy who women talk to about their relationship problems, and how their mean jerk boyfriend is being abusive again... you can be the guy who they're dating and sleeping with!
This weekend I'd like you to think about what I've said here in this article.
Think about how you can cultivate the four qualities that I've mentioned above into your personality.
See if you can be a little less predictable.
Don't let outside events or women control you.
Be more of a challenge.
Stop being submissive... and get in touch with that side of you that is more dominant (I said "dominant", not "domineering").
Find out more about the Double Your Dating techniques for meeting and dating women
...and watch it in action, learn it, and use it.
Talk to you soon,
David D.
(c) Robert Lee, aLoveLinksPlus.com and David DeAngelo Inc. All Rights Reserved.


text: Hi folks. I'd like to play the archives of a radio show (http://wfmu.org/playlists/BB) on my iTouch, but most of them are either in a pop-up player that requires Flash, which Apple doesn't use, or in RealAudio, which the iTouch refuses to download. Anyone have any ideas on how to access this material? Thanks, Dave


text: Idk if anyone else has had this problem, but whenever i search for a song in spotlight and click on it it plays a different song but one by the same artist and on the same album. If i go back to the search and click the song a second time (if i still have the music app open) it will play the right song. This bug isn't that bad, but it is somewhat bothersome. Anyone else have this problem and/or have any ideas on how to fix this?


text:
Sorry, this item sold. You may also like:
This little dish is very unique and is in very good vintage condition. It has a great design with a crane and the bottom is marked, "Korea." It measures 4.5" diameter.
Convo me with any questions. Thanks!
Convo me with any questions. Thanks!
Meet the owner of OneDecemberLearn more about the shop and process
Vintage Small Brass Korean Dish, Ashtray, Crane Design - Made in Korea
- Vintage item from the 1950s
- Materials: metal, brass
- Ships worldwide from United States
- Feedback: 663 reviews
- Favorited by: 15 people
- Listed on Oct 12, 2012
- 368 views
- 15 favorites


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
July 19, 2012
COTEY WYNN, RODNEY BENNETT, AND JOSHUA ROSS, APPELLANTS,v.UNITED STATES, APPELLEE.
Appeals from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (FEL-4217-05, CF1-26693-06, and CF1-26708-06) (Hon. Geoffrey M. Alprin, Trial Judge )
Argued March 28, 2012
Before FISHER and OBERLY, Associate Judges, and WAGNER, Senior Judge.
Although they were acquitted of murdering Damon Clark,*fn1 appellants Rodney Bennett, Joshua Ross, and Cotey Wynn were convicted of obstructing justice, in violation of D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(6) (2001).*fn2 Because appellants' conduct did not amount to obstructing "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding," we reverse their convictions for obstruction of justice. However, we affirm Mr. Wynn's separate conviction for carrying a pistol without a license ("CPWL").*fn3
I. Facts
Just before midnight on April 19, 2004, Metropolitan Police Department ("MPD") Officers Eric Hairston and Charles Marshall were patrolling in the Trinidad neighborhood when they heard the sound of gunshots.Within fifteen seconds, they responded to Penn Street and Montello Avenue, an area where other officers found Damon Clark lying in the street, mortally wounded.
Officer Marshall immediately spotted a man, later identified by witnesses as appellant Joshua Ross, crouching next to a burgundy Buick. When Officer Marshall ordered Ross to "[c]ome out, show your hands," Ross instead fled toward the apartment of Fayetta Goodwine on Penn Street. While Officer Marshall chased Ross, Officer Hairston approached the burgundy Buick and found a black 9-mm Glock pistol on top of the front passenger's side tire, next to where Ross had been crouching.*fn4
Ms. Goodwine was returning home when she saw Ross crouching next to the Buick and then running from the police. Goodwine entered her apartment, and within minutes Ross, Bennett, and Wynn, all of whom she knew, came in through the front and back doors. One of the police officers yelled for someone to "open the door," but when Goodwine attempted to comply, Bennett pushed back on the door. "He just shut the door and the police had to wrestle him with the door." After Bennett closed the door, the police did not attempt to enter the apartment.
Ms. Goodwine turned to appellants and asked if they had "anything in my house," meaning "anything that would, you know, . . . get me in [] trouble." None of them responded, and Wynn and Ross left the room. However, once Bennett and Goodwine were alone, Bennett admitted "that they did have something in there."
Goodwine went into her bedroom, where she found Wynn and Ross. Wynn was putting a gun into an opaque bag;Ross, meanwhile, was reaching for the bag. Goodwine told appellants, "if y'all got anything in here, let me know, let's get it out here because I didn't want to go to jail or lose my apartment behind it." Ross then asked Goodwine if he could go upstairs with her to the apartment of Goodwine's nieces. Goodwine told Ross no, and took the bag with the gun. She went upstairs alone and hid the bag in her nieces' bathroom. Police never recovered the weapon.*fn5
The police made no arrests that night. Inside a Toyota Camry parked near where Damon Clark had been killed, police recovered a .45-caliber Hi-Point handgun with a bullet stuck in its barrel.An officer was able to fire the weapon after he pushed out the projectile and pulled back the slide, ejecting the casing. During his opening statement and closing argument, Wynn's counsel admitted that the gun belonged to Wynn, but contended that it was inoperable.
At trial, the government argued that the obstruction of justice charges were for "the hiding of the guns. Defendant Ross hides a gun under the car under the Buick tire. Defendant Bennett gives the heads up to [Goodwine] about a gun that needs to be hidden in the house and Defendant [Wynn] gives that gun to [Goodwine] to hide upstairs." The prosecutor added that "they obstructed justice, because Defendant Bennett was holding the door closed so that the police couldn't get in."
II. Obstruction of Justice
A. The Statute
Under D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(6), "[a] person commits the offense of obstruction of justice if that person: . . . [c]orruptly, or by threats of force, any way obstructs or impedes or endeavors to obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in any official proceeding." This provision appears at the end of a series of subsections enumerating various means of committing obstruction of justice, several of which also refer to an "official proceeding." See D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(1)-(6) (2001).*fn6 The term "official proceeding" is defined in § 22-721 (4) as "any trial, hearing, investigation, or other proceeding in a court of the District of Columbia or conducted by the Council of the District of Columbia or an agency or department of the District of Columbia government, or a grand jury proceeding."
During appellant's trial, the jury was instructed without objection that "[t]he term official proceeding means any trial, hearing, investigation or other proceeding, that is[,] the investigation of the fatal shooting of Damon Clark conducted by the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia." Appellants claim, however, that their convictions for obstruction of justice "cannot stand because the MPD's investigation into Clark's shooting did not constitute an 'official proceeding' in which the 'due administration of justice' was administered." This issue thus turns on whether "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding" can fairly be said to include the actions of police officers first responding to the scene of a violent crime. We answer "no."
B. Timberlake and Crutchfield
The government contends that appellants' "claim is foreclosed" by our decisions in Timberlake v. United States, 758 A.2d 978 (D.C. 2000),and Crutchfield v. United States, 779 A.2d 307 (D.C. 2001).However, although these opinions addressed similar issues, we have not definitively answered "the difficult question[] of what constitutes an 'official proceeding.'" Timberlake, 758 A.2d at 983 n.6. Moreover, neither Timberlake nor Crutchfield interpreted what constitutes obstruction of "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding" as prohibited by D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(6).
In Timberlake, the defendant was convicted under D.C. Code § 22-723 (a) (1996)*fn7 of tampering with physical evidence. 758 A.2d at 979. Although the definition of "official proceeding" applies to both offenses, tampering with physical evidence is a distinct crime from obstruction of justice. Under § 22-723 (a), a defendant must know or have "reason to believe an official proceeding has begun" or know "that an official proceeding is likely to be instituted." We specifically noted in Timberlake that "only the knowledge element of the offense [wa]s at issue." Id. at 981.
After "a marked police car drove through the intersection, and an unknown female yelled 'five-o,' indicating that police were in the area," Timberlake hid bags of drugs in his mouth. Id. at 980. Unexpectedly, an undercover police officer identified himself and tried to prevent Timberlake from swallowing the bags. Id. We concluded that, "[o]n the facts of this case, a reasonable jury could find that once Officer Neill [the undercover officer] had identified himself and the struggle ensued, Timberlake knew an official proceeding was likely to be instituted against him and thus possessed the requisite state of mind as he attempted to destroy (i.e., swallow) the evidence." Id. at 983 (emphasis added). In this holding, the court seemed to be treating the criminal prosecution that followed, rather than the police investigation, as the "official proceeding." This understanding of the opinion in Timberlake is supported by the quotation from a Colorado case which followed immediately thereafter. See 758 A.2d at 983 (quoting Frayer v. People,684 P.2d 927, 929 (Colo. 1984) (en banc) ("A person arrested with such contraband in her possession . . . has every reason to believe that formal charges will be filed against her.")).
We thus did not rest our holding on the government's argument that, before the officer identified himself, Timberlake "knew, or had reason to believe, that an official proceeding (i.e., a police investigation) had begun, or was likely to be instituted." Timberlake, 758 A.2d at 981. Noting that we were affirming "on an alternative theory," we did "not reach the difficult questions of what constitutes an 'official proceeding' and what is sufficient subjective knowledge that an official proceeding is 'likely to be instituted' absent circumstances that objectively manifest the proceeding, such as confrontation with police while in possession of contraband." Id. at 983 n.6. We noted, moreover, that "[w]e have never addressed the degree of formality or specificity required for there to be an 'official proceeding.'" Id. We therefore do not interpret Timberlake as holding that an incipient police investigation is an "official proceeding."
The government also asserts that in Crutchfield v. United States our court "squarely held that a police investigation is an 'official proceeding' under D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(6)." But in Crutchfield, the defendant was convicted of obstructing justice under § 22-722 (a)(2), a separate provision criminalizing interference with witnesses. 779 A.2d at 312-13 n.1; see supra note 6. We did not interpret what constitutes "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding" within the meaning of § 22-722 (a)(6).
Crutchfield had murdered three people, and he later killed Takiesha Wiseman, a friend who was a potential witness against him. His appeal required this court to focus upon § 22-721 (4)'s definition of an "official proceeding," and portions of our opinion appear to refer to an ongoing police investigation of the triple murder as the official proceeding. See Crutchfield, 779 A.2d at 328. Quoting the definition of an "official proceeding," the court italicized the portion related to an "investigation" conducted by "an agency or department of the District of Columbia government." Id. at 328. It also quoted the definition of a "criminal investigation."*fn8 Nevertheless, Crutchfield also involved a formal grand jury investigation and a pending criminal prosecution, both of which are unquestionably covered by the definition of an "official proceeding." Id. at 315, 328; see D.C. Code § 22-721 (4) (1996).
Part of the proof against Crutchfield included evidence that "less than two weeks before Wiseman's death, she and appellant were at the courthouse office of appellant's aunt inquiring as to the status of the case against Simpson pertaining to the triple murder." Crutchfield, 779 A.2d at 328. Having examined the record in Crutchfield,appellant Bennett further informs us that the indictment against Crutchfield charged that he "endeavored to influence, intimidate, and impede a witness, that is, Takiesha Wiseman, in a Grand Jury Investigation in the case of United States v. Jamyra Simpson . . . and in In re: Darryl D. Crutchfield, an official proceeding in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia."*fn9 He
also represents that neither Crutchfield nor the government addressed in their briefs whether a police investigation qualified as an official proceeding.Thus, the court's conclusion that appellant was aware "of an ongoing investigation into the triple murder, which qualifies as an official proceeding under the obstruction statute," was most likely a reference to the ongoing grand jury investigation. Crutchfield, 779 A.2d at 328.
We conclude that neither Timberlake nor Crutchfield "squarely held" that a police investigation constitutes an "official proceeding" within the meaning of the obstruction of justice statute. More importantly, this court has not decided what constitutes "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding."
C. Statutory Construction
Appellants moved for judgment of acquittal on the obstruction of justice charges, but they failed to argue that MPD's incipient investigation into Clark's shooting was not an "official proceeding" involving the "due administration of justice." Nor did they object to the instruction which referred to the police investigation as an "official proceeding." Nevertheless, it is conceptually difficult to determine our standard of review.
Although appellants' claim is, at least in part, an attack upon the sufficiency of the evidence, see Newby v. United States, 797 A.2d 1233, 1237-39 (D.C. 2002), there was no additional evidence the government could have produced to meet their challenge had appellants couched it in these terms in the trial court. Ultimately, appellants assert that the government's theory of prosecution was misconceived. See id. at 1239 (Appellant's "claims turn on pure questions of law: whether the simple assault statute applies to parent-child assaults at all, and whether the government must prove malice to overcome the assertion of the parental discipline defense. Our review of these questions is de novo.").
At bottom, we are called upon to determine the reach of the statute which prohibits obstruction of justice. Cf. Mitchell v. District of Columbia, 741 A.2d 1049, 1052 (D.C. 1999) ("Essentially, Mitchell argues that his conviction is based on conduct which the statute does not make a crime . . . ."). "It would be both an obvious error and a miscarriage of justice for a defendant to stand convicted of an offense which the law does not make a crime." Id. at 1052-53; see also Jeffrey v. United States, 892 A.2d 1122, 1128 (D.C. 2006) ("Because Jeffrey failed to raise this specific claim in the trial court, we would ordinarily review it for plain error. . . . Due to the importance of the statutory interpretation issue, however, we have decided to review the case de novo.").
We review issues of statutory construction de novo. See District of Columbia v. Economides, 968 A.2d 1032, 1035 (D.C. 2009). "When interpreting a statute, the judicial task is to discern, and give effect to, the legislature's intent." A.R. v. F.C., 33 A.3d 403, 405 (D.C. 2011) (quoting Grayson v. AT&T Corp., 15 A.3d 219, 237 (D.C. 2011) (en banc)). "The primary and general rule of statutory construction is that the intent of the lawmaker is to be found in the language that he has used." Peoples Drug Stores v. District of Columbia, 470 A.2d 751, 753 (D.C. 1983) (en banc). "We recognize, however, that a word in a statute may or may not extend to the outer limits of its definitional possibilities." Tippett v. Daly, 10 A.3d 1123, 1127 (D.C. 2010) (en banc) (quoting Dolan v. United States Postal Service, 546 U.S. 481, 486 (2006)) (internal editing and quotation marks omitted). "The meaning -- or ambiguity -- of certain words or phrases may only become evident when placed in context." Id. (quoting FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 132 (2000)). Therefore, "we do not read statutory words in isolation; the language of surrounding and related paragraphs may be instrumental to understanding them." District of Columbia v. Beretta, U.S.A., Corp., 872 A.2d 633, 652 (D.C. 2005) (en banc).
Under D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(6), a person commits obstruction of justice if he "[c]orruptly, or by threats of force, [in] any way obstructs or impedes or endeavors to obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in any official proceeding." To reiterate, § 22-721 (4) defines "official proceeding" to mean "any trial, hearing, investigation, or other proceeding in a court of the District of Columbia or conducted by the Council of the District of Columbia or an agency or department of the District of Columbia government, or a grand jury proceeding."
D. Official Proceeding
The government argues that because an "official proceeding" literally includes at least some types of "investigation[s] . . . conducted by . . . an agency . . . of the District of Columbia government," D.C. Code § 22-721 (4) (2001), and because the Metropolitan Police Department is one such agency, § 22-722 (a)(6) should apply to any police investigation. But this reading omits the full language of the statute that gives these terms meaning, including the language of § 22-722 (a)(6) itself. See Moskal v. United States, 498 U.S. 103, 109-10 (1990) ("a court should give effect, if possible, to every clause and word of a statute" (quotation marks omitted)).
On its face, the term "official proceeding" suggests a formal event. Whether the event is a "trial, hearing, [or] investigation," it still must be a "proceeding" of some sort. The word "proceeding" may comfortably be used to describe investigations by a grand jury, the Council of the District of Columbia, or various administrative agencies.*fn10 See BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1324 (9th ed. 2009) (defining "proceeding" as "[t]he regular and orderly progression of a lawsuit" or "[t]he business conducted by a court or other official body; a hearing"). It is unclear what a "proceeding," much less an "official proceeding," would mean in the context of a rapidly unfolding MPD response to the sound of gunshots.
The term "official proceeding" is used throughout § 22-722 in contexts that bear little resemblance to a preliminary street investigation by police. For example, the obstruction of justice statute punishes endeavors to "prevent the truthful testimony of [a] person in an official proceeding," to "[e]vade a legal process that summons the person to appear as a witness or produce a document in an official proceeding," or to "harass[]" a person for "assisting in a prosecution or other official proceeding." D.C. Code §§ 22-722 (a)(2)(A),
(C), (3)(D) (2001). The language of these prohibitions suggests a formal process where evidence is elicited through testimony or produced in response to subpoenas.
The legislative history of §§ 22-722 (a)(6) and 22-721 (4) supports this more formal concept of an "official proceeding." When the Council first defined the term in 1982,*fn11 it meant "any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in any Court of the District of Columbia or any agency or department of the District of Columbia government." D.C. Code § 22-721 (4) (1989). The Council Report expressly stated that the "term [wa]s intended to include proceedings in which rights, issues, or other matters are adjudicated as well as investigatory proceedings such as grand jury proceedings." D.C. Council, Report on Bill 4-133 at 104 (Feb. 12, 1981).
In 1993, the Council expanded § 22-721 to explicitly "include with[in] the definition of 'official proceedings' grand jury and Council of the District of Columbia proceedings." D.C. Council, Report on Bill 9-385 at 3 (May 20, 1992).*fn12 It did so by adding the words "investigation," "conducted by the Council of the District of Columbia," and "a grand jury proceeding" to the definition of official proceeding. D.C. Code § 22-721 (4) (1993 Supp.). The resulting definition is the same one we have today: "any trial, hearing, investigation, or other proceeding in a court of the District of Columbia or conducted by the Council of the District of Columbia or an agency or department of the District of Columbia government, or a grand jury proceeding." D.C. Code § 22-721 (4) (1993 Supp.); D.C. Code § 22-721 (4) (2001) (emphasis added).
Thus, when the Council originally inserted the term "investigation," it did so with the clear intention of adding formal investigations by the grand jury and the Council itself. When the Council enacted the catchall "due administration of justice" provision, it gave no indication that it intended to transform the meaning of "official proceeding" and create a new felony for endeavoring to hide evidence from,*fn13 or elude capture by, police officers responding to the scene of a crime. Rather, the Council's consistent theme was its concern for the safety of government witnesses.*fn14
The initial investigation of a crime by police fits comfortably within the separate definition of a "criminal investigation" -- "an investigation of a violation of any criminal statute in effect in the District of Columbia." D.C. Code § 22-721 (3) (2001). Notably, however, a person obstructs justice under the related subsection of § 22-722 only when he or she "injures or threatens to injure any person or his or her property on account of" a person giving information "to a criminal investigator in the course of any criminal investigation . . . ." D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(4) (2011 Supp.); see McCullough v. United States, 827 A.2d 48, 58 (D.C. 2003) (witness murdered for reporting assault to the police). Because the statute already includes a police investigation within the definition of "criminal investigation," we need not stretch the meaning of "official proceeding" to reach the very same circumstances. See Tuten v. United States, 440 A.2d 1008, 1010 (D.C. 1982) ("A statute should not be construed in such a way as to render certain provisions superfluous or insignificant."), aff'd, 460 U.S. 660 (1983).
Appellants were convicted under § 22-722 (a)(6), which requires that the defendant have "endeavor[ed] to obstruct or impede the due administration of justice in any official proceeding." (Emphasis added.) While the term "official proceeding" standing alone conceivably could include an initial police investigation of street crime, "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding" manifestly does not.
E. Due Administration of Justice
The phrase "due administration of justice" is used primarily, if not exclusively, to describe the proper functioning and integrity of a court or hearing. See, e.g., Fields v. United States, 793 A.2d 1260, 1266 (D.C. 2002) (By "inhibiting Tyanna Weedon from testifying freely and truthfully, . . . Fields was attempting to impede the due administration of justice."); Greene v. Weatherington, 301 F.2d 565, 567 (D.C. Cir. 1962) ("[T]he due administration of justice requires that a court shall not permit interference with the progress of a cause pending before it."); Moss v. United States, 23 App. D.C. 475, 483 (1904) ("'The power to punish for contempts is inherent in all courts: its existence is essential to the preservation of order in judicial proceedings, and to the enforcement of the judgments, orders, and writs of the courts, and consequently to the due administration of justice.'" (quoting Ex parte Robinson, 86 U.S. 505, 510 (1873))).And although we did not directly interpret the phrase, our prior cases involving convictions for obstructing "the due administration of justice" illustrate this more natural reading of the term. For instance, in Castillo-Campos v. United States, an appellant obstructed the due administration of justice on a scheduled court date by endeavoring to intimidate potential government witnesses during a discussion of "snitching" in a holding cell. 987 A.2d 476, 492 (D.C. 2010); see also Ball v. United States, 429 A.2d 1353, 1355
n.2 (D.C. 1981) (intimidating subpoenaed witnesses); Caldwell v. United States, 218 F.2d 370, 371 (D.C. Cir. 1954) (attempting to obtain information from sitting jurors).
When MPD officers chased Mr. Ross down a darkened alleyway and wrestled with Mr. Bennett to open the apartment door, they were investigating a recently committed crime. But it would be anomalous to describe these officers as engaged in "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding" as they rushed to the scene of a street shooting and responded to the emergency situation they found there.
For all of these reasons, we conclude that the Council did not intend for "the due administration of justice in any official proceeding" to include an initial police response to the scene of a crime. We therefore reverse appellants' convictions under D.C. Code § 22-722 (a)(6) (2001).*fn15
III. Special Unanimity
Cotey Wynn was also found guilty of carrying a pistol without a license ("CPWL") after having previously been convicted of a felony. D.C. Code § 22-4504 (a)(2) (2001). He argues on appeal that the trial court was required to give a special unanimity instruction, cautioning jurors that they must unanimously agree which, if any, firearm he carried.See Criminal Jury Instructions for the District of Columbia, No. 2.406, Special Unanimity (5th ed. rev. 2011). Mr. Wynn concedes that he did not request a special unanimity instruction and that our review is for plain error. See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 (1993).*fn16
The Constitution guarantees the right to a unanimous verdict. Scarborough v. United States, 522 A.2d 869, 873 (D.C. 1987) (en banc). Thus, "'[w]here one charge encompasses two separate incidents, the judge must instruct the jury that if a guilty verdict is returned the jurors must be unanimous as to which incident or incidents they find the defendant guilty.'" Youssef v. United States, 27 A.3d 1202, 1208 n.9 (D.C. 2011) (quoting Scarborough, 522 A.2d at 871). "Incidents have been found to be factually separate when separate criminal acts have occurred at different times and were separated by intervening events; when they occurred at different places; when the defendant has reached a fork in the road and has decided to invade a different interest; or when the first act has come to an end and the next act is motivated by a fresh impulse." Gray v. United States, 544 A.2d 1255, 1257 (D.C. 1988) (citations omitted).
The jury could have found Mr. Wynn guilty of CPWL based upon three factual scenarios -- that Wynn (1) carried a pistol he used to shoot at Damon Clark, (2) carried the unrecovered handgun that Goodwine saw in her apartment, or (3) carried the .45 caliber pistol found in the Toyota Camry (a handgun which Wynn's counsel admitted belonged to his client). Each of these scenarios involves possession of (potentially) different weapons, at different times, and in different locations. See Youssef, 27 A.3d at 1208 n.9 (special unanimity instruction required where "each of appellant's individual unauthorized transfers of $250 or more encompassed a separate incident of theft").
One could not fairly characterize these discrete acts of possession as "a continuing course of conduct," given the factual disparity of the scenarios. Instead, the facts of this case are analogous to those in Hack v. United States, where we held that the defendant's possession of marijuana laced with PCP (which he discarded while fleeing police), and his possession of marijuana only moments later in the back of a police car, were two factually separate incidents requiring a special unanimity instruction. 445 A.2d 634, 641 (D.C. 1982).
Nevertheless, because appellant failed to preserve his claim at trial, it is not enough to show that a special unanimity instruction was warranted. See Youssef, 27 A.3d at 1207. Appellant also bears the burden of showing that the error was "clear" or "obvious," Olano, 507 U.S. at 734, that it affected his "substantial rights," Lowery v. United States, 3 A.3d 1169, 1173 (D.C. 2010), and "that the lack of a unanimity instruction jeopardized the fairness and integrity of his trial." Youssef, 27 A.3d at 1208; cf. Wheeler v. United States, 930 A.2d 232, 248 (D.C. 2007) (discretion to reverse on plain error review "should be exercised only in 'particularly egregious' situations" (quoting Dixon v. United States, 565 A.2d 72, 75 (D.C. 1989))).
Citing Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624 (1991) (plurality opinion), and Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813 (1999), the government asserts that "intervening Supreme Court case law ha[s] cast into doubt the 'factually separate incidents' test." According to the government, Mr. Wynn thus cannot show that the error should have been "clear" or "obvious" at the time of his trial. See Thomas v. United States, 914 A.2d 1, 20 (D.C. 2006). However, Scarborough v. United States, an en banc decision of this court, has never been overruled, and in Williams v. United States, we explained why the government's position is a misreading of Schad and Richardson.*fn17 981 A.2d 1224, 1229-30 (D.C. 2009). Both Supreme Court decisions reinforced the principle "that the jury is required to unanimously agree as to which instances of a crime the defendant committed." United States v. Newell, 658 F.3d 1, 23 (1st Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 1069 (2012). It was therefore clear or obvious error for the court not to deliver a special unanimity instruction regarding the CPWL charge against Wynn.
However, it is doubtful that Mr. Wynn's "substantial rights" were affected by the failure to give a special unanimity instruction. Although there was evidence regarding three instances of carrying a pistol, the most natural conclusion is that the jury convicted Mr. Wynn for carrying the.45 caliber handgun found in his girlfriend's Toyota Camry.*fn18 During his opening statement, defense counsel told the jury that the .45 caliber pistol was Mr. Wynn's. He argued in closing, however, that "this particular firearm was jammed" and "the instructions say in order to find Mr. Wynn guilty of carrying a pistol without a license . . . the firearm has to be operable and you simply don't have that element."
But at trial an officer testified that although a bullet was stuck in the firearm's barrel, other officers merely "pushed it out"; thereafter, the weapon was successfully test-fired. The jury could have readily concluded that the gun jammed while Mr. Wynn was using it, or that the easily removed obstruction did not render the gun "inoperable." See Rouse v. United States, 391 A.2d 790, 791 (D.C. 1978) (jury could conclude that disassembled pistol was operable because it could be "quickly and easily reassembled into an operable gun"). During rebuttal, the government responded to Wynn's arguments, focusing the jury's attention on evidence of the weapon's operability.*fn19
In any event, on this record, appellant has not shown that the lack of a special unanimity instruction "seriously affect[ed] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings." Lowery, 3 A.3d at 1173 (quoting In re D.B., 947 A.2d 443, 450 (D.C. 2008)). The trial court issued a general unanimity instruction,and the most likely basis of conviction, that Mr. Wynn carried the pistol found in the Toyota Camry, was supported by ample evidence. "In other words, this is not one of those 'exceptional circumstances where a miscarriage of justice' will result if we do not reverse." Davis v. United States, 984 A.2d 1255, 1260 (D.C. 2009) (quoting Harris v. United States, 602 A.2d 154, 159 (D.C. 1992)).
IV. Conclusion
Appellants' convictions for obstruction of justice are hereby reversed. Appellant Wynn's conviction for CPWL is affirmed, and his case is remanded for possible resentencing. See Stoney v. United States, 494 A.2d 1303, 1304 (D.C. 1985) ("We reverse the conviction for obstructing justice, affirm the other convictions, and remand for resentencing.") (citing Thorne v. United States, 471 A.2d 247 (D.C. 1983) (per curiam)).
It is so ordered.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Gecko Big Island Tours offers a variety of land tours out of Hilo and Kona, their newest addition is a combo of ziplining and a land tour. The comfort and luxury of the SUVs and crossover vehicles they have allows extreme flexibility in making your sight-seeing adventures of Hawaii's natural wonders more enjoyable. Tours can be customized to fit you and your group for a perfect Hawaii day.
Gecko Big Island Tours is a sightseeing tour company that operates out of the Hilo region of the Big Island. Its primary focus in on half and full day tours of the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park but also offers tours to the surrounding waterfalls and the Hamakua Coast region which also includes an adventurous 7 stage zipline course in its itinerary.
User Comments are a new feature: Be the first to submit a Comment!


text:
MyAmsterdam: Mightyfools
Quick linksShow venue on map More events in this venue
Add event to my program
Remove event from my program
Add venue to favorites
Remove from favorites
15:30 - 16:30 | Free entrance
I amsterdam Store | De Ruijterkade 28a-d, Amsterdam
MYAmsterdam Kicks Off At Station Centraal
ADE is bringing some of its biggest artist names to Amsterdam's main point of arrival, the forecourt outside Central Station. MYAmsterdam features top DJs in an extension of MusicTalks which will be held in the IAMsterdam store in front of Central Station. It's a small room with a capacity of only 50 people, surrounded by glass windows, so even if you can't get in to the venue itself, you can watch the action from outside! All the artists involved in the MYAmsterdam series have a close connection with Amsterdam. Some because they were born here and lived here all their lives, others are artists that have been significantly inspired by the city and its culture, and some are people that moved to Amsterdam because of its music scene! Entrance is free for everyone, and on a first come first served basis! From Wednesday to Saturday ADE will host three or four interviews per day.
Touring for 8 years without a pause, Jelle Keizer and Andy Samin better known as Mightyfools have been festival favorites for setting trends and pushing boundaries on the biggest events around the world.
It's rare an act can stay relevant for such a long time without falling into quick hypes. Unique tracks like 'Footrocker', 'Garuda' and 'No Class' with Yellow Claw have been copied by many but never equaled.
ADE Card 2016
Too many benefits for just €10,-More info


text:
World Bulletin / News Desk
Google Inc's Chrome, the world's top Internet browser, is now available on the iPhone and iPad, as Apple Inc finally granted access to its arch-foe's more popular Web-surfing app.
At Google's annual I/O developer conference in San Francisco on Thursday, company executives announced the development as well as a limited launch of a cloud-computing and hosting service totake on Amazon.com's thriving Web services arm.
Both moves underscore how Google is moving quickly to safeguard its dominant Internet presence.
Launched in 2008, Google's browser overtook Microsoft Corp's Internet Explorer in May as the world's most popular, according to analytics company StatCounter.
"No matter which device you're using, we are working really hard across all important software platforms," Google Senior Vice President Sundar Pichai said. "We want to make sure it's about the user."
Chrome has 310 million "active" users, Pichai said. Google's browser, along with Google Drive, the cloud storage service, will begin appearing in Apple's App Store for download later on Thursday, Google said.
Amazon warrior
Google also unveiled a cloud infrastructure service that will compete with Amazon's Web Service. Called Google Compute Engine, the new service will provide hosting for Web companies on Google's data centers.
Google did not announce the pricing on Compute Engine. But in an oblique reference to Amazon, Google executives promised "up to 50 percent more computing power for your dollar than competing cloud services."
Google said Thursday it would make Compute Engine available on a "limited preview" basis.
Russia and 10 other non-OPEC states will reduce their production by more than half a million barrels per day (bpd), OPEC announced.
Direct trading using the 2 national currencies will be launched on the interbank forex market on Dec. 12, says FX watchdog
The Bank of France revised its 2016 and 2017 growth forecast down to 1.3 percent, having previously expected growth of 1.4 percent this year and 1.5 percent next year.
Ursula von der Leyen held talks with her Saudi counterpart, Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, on boosting the "excellent bilateral relations" between the two countries, the mission added.
Most analysts predict president Mario Draghi will extend an 80-billion-euro ($86-billion) per month bond-buying scheme beyond the current March deadline at his press conference.
A record-setting wave of Chinese investment abroad has fuelled concern in Beijing over capital flight, reckless spending overseas, and the yuan's fall against the US dollar.
The deal is part of a broader privatisation drive and comes despite Moscow being mired in Western sanctions over the crisis in Ukraine that have played a major part in plunging the country into recession.
Germany's ambassador to Ankara says German companies operating in Turkey should think about tomorrow
After months of disagreement, OPEC members last week hammered out a deal to cut oil output for the first time in eight years.
Ali Shareef al-Emadi predicted growth of 3.4 percent in 2017, in line with an International Monetary Fund estimate and up from a projected 3.2 percent this year.
"Many citizens in advanced economies are facing heightened uncertainty, lamenting a loss of control and losing trust in the system," Carney said in a speech at Liverpool's John Moores University.
European stock markets are also set for a weak start, with Italy underperforming as investors brace for turbulence and political crisis in the euro zone's heavily indebted third-largest economy.
The euro tumbled on Monday after Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi said he would resign as he conceded defeat in a referendum over his plan to reform the constitution
Rouhani's 2017-2018 budget is based on oil prices of $50 per barrel, up from $40 last year, with a focus on unemployment, water resources, railways and the environment.
Turkish parliament has already ratified the deal on construction of 'TurkStream' natural gas pipeline


text:
Prices, promotions, styles, and availability may vary. Our local stores do not honor online pricing. Prices and availability of products and services are subject to change without notice. Errors will be corrected where discovered, and Lowe's reserves the right to revoke any stated offer and to correct any errors, inaccuracies or omissions including after an order has been submitted.
KOHLER Memoirs Black Black 1.28-GPF (4.85-LPF) 12-in Rough-In Single-Flush Toilet Tank
Item # 149608 Model # 4492-7
Manufacturer Color/Finish
Black Black
Product Information
- Offers traditional styling for your bath or powder room
- Integrates with the timeless elegance of the Memoirs® suite for a unified design throughout your room
- Available in a palette of Kohler colors and Artist Editions designs to complement any d�cor
- Use the 4289 Memoirs round-front toilet bowl to create 3511 Memoirs round-front toilet with Stately design
- Please see 3526 Memoirs Comfort Height® elongated toilet with Stately design for full details
|Collection Name
|Flush Type
|High Efficiency
|Color/Finish Family
|Manufacturer Color/Finish
|Black Black
|Rough-In Size
|Lined Tank
|Flush Lever Location
|Left front
|Depth (Inches)
|Width (Inches)
|Height (Inches)
|Weight (lbs.)
|Toilet Flushing System
|Gravity fed


text:
Our Market has the heart of a farmers market, but with a broad array of quality goods for sale. You may find gourmet foods, organic meats next to fruits and vegetables, or perhaps dried floral arrangements and fragrances candles next to lovely perennials or cut flowers. You might also find hand crafted jewelry, artwork, pottery, handcrafted cards, fresh cheeses and bread…or a nun selling pastries. The possibilities are endless. This season, the Niles Market will take place every Thursday and Saturday from May 20 through October 2 from 9 am to 2 pm.
Corner of Front & Main St
Niles, MI 49120
Driving Directions
Phone: (269) 687-4332
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Visit Niles Page on michigan.org
Conquer your holiday shopping with Pure MichiganMore
Join 500,000 other
people who receive the free Pure Michigan e-newsletter. View the Current Issue
Get the Official
© 2016 Michigan Economic Development Corporation
300 N. Washington Sq., Lansing, MI 48913


text:
Bostitch | SKU: T22323 | Model: 55-502
36" Spring Steel Wrecking Bar
Price: $11.95
Bostitch 55-502 - 36" Spring Steel Wrecking Bar
click to zoom
See this item in our 2016 Main Catalog!331
Need it fast? Please call 1-800-523-4777 or click the chat button to speak with one of our service agents to expedite this order.
The Bostitch 36-Inch Spring Steel Wrecking Bar is ideal for heavy duty demolition work. It is constructed of spring steel for extreme strength and durability. This tool has a wider prying edge for better leverage and a flat striking face for demolition work. Its overall weight makes it very lightweight and easy to control. This tool is ideal for all demolition applications.
Accessories and Related Items: View All
You May Also Like:
Customers who purchased this item also purchased:
Animation for T22323


text:
Product Description
Double Laundry Basket …
Genuinely hand woven from the highest quality wicker around a solid hardwood frame this attractive Double Laundry Basket will complement the light and airy feel to any room.
The painted white finish is applied evenly by hand and the lid has a wooden support that holds it open when needed. There is also a leather clasp to hold it shut if required.
The linen laundry bags inside the frame in each compartment sit on velcro fixings making them removable so the laundry can be very easily transferred to the washing machine in one go.
Height: 68cm
Width: 50cm
Depth: 38cm


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
June 17, 2010
GREGORY ANTHONY POWELL, PETITIONER,v.D. L. RUNNELS, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
Petitioner, a prisoner without counsel, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This case is before the court following transfer by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on June 5, 2009. Dckt. No. 5. While the case was still in the Northern District, petitioner sought leave proceed in forma pauperis, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). However, that court informed petitioner that his application to so proceed was deficient in that it failed to include a Certificate of Funds in Prisoner's Account, completed and signed by an authorized prison official or a copy of petitioner's trust account statement showing transactions for the six months preceding the filing of the petition. Dckt. No. 4; see 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).
Pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), Rule 3(a)(2) of the Federal Rules Governing § 2254 Cases requires a habeas petitioner to submit ". . . certification from the warden or other appropriate officer of the place of confinement showing the amount of money or securities that the petitioner has in any account in the institution." This requirement may be satisfied by having the appropriate prison official complete the certificate portion of the form application or by submitting a certified copy of petitioner's prison trust account statement. Petitioner has not filed an in forma pauperis application complying with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) and Rule 3(a)(2).
Accordingly, within 30 days from the day this order is served, petitioner may submit either the $5 filing fee or a complete affidavit as required by § 1915(a). Petitioner's failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail to petitioner a form application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
So ordered.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
WEST Brewery
- Telephone 0141 550 0135
- Seasonal times Comedy Festival licence (Mar) open until 1am
- Bar open Mon–Thu 11am–-11pm; Fri/Sat 11am–midnight; Sun 12.30–11pm.
- Food served Mon–Sun 11am–9pm
- Average price £13 (set lunch); £15 (evening meal)
- Website www.westbeer.com
A German-style beer hall and brewery serving Bavarian-inspired food and home-brewed beers in a striking Glasgow Green building.
The 2016 edition of The List's Eating & Drinking Guide is out now – only £5.95 (+p&p).
This review is taken from the current (2016) edition.
Set in a 180-year-old building that wouldn't look out of place on a vintage postcard of Bavaria, WEST has been trailblazing German food and drink in Glasgow for over a decade. Its beer hall's dark wood-panelled walls, seats and floors also feel authentically continental, but the German-style lager and dark beers, which are brewed on-site, have been given a sense of place with Glasgow-inspired names (King Tuts and St. Mungo feature). The menu is extensive but the currywurst, with sausages scored diagonally to allow curry sauce to permeate all the way through, and excellent-value serving platters with dinky pots of mackerel paste, rye bread and gherkins, are two of the best options. A popular haunt for those looking to refuel after a walk on the neighbouring Glasgow Green, it's a thought to book in advance for a guaranteed seat, as, by early afternoon on a Saturday or Sunday, WEST is often mobbed.
- High point: Post-meal brewery tour a great way to end a visit
- Low point: Bar is extremely deep for drink tray passing
- Notable dish: Currywurst with fries and salad
- Private dining: Up to 64 covers
- Provides: Vegetarian options (at least ¼ main courses), Children's portions, Children's high chairs, Wheelchair access, Outdoor tables, Free wi-fi
- Music on stereo: Eclectic
- Live entertainment: Venue for Glasgow comedy festival, folk nights
- Capacity: 64 (private function room), 90 main room
- Largest group: 250
- Open since: 2006
- Number of wines sold by the glass: 12
- House wine: £16.95 per bottle
Event times
WEST Brewery Comedy Night
A night of comedy at the brewery.
Thu 8 Dec
£10 / 0141 550 0135
With headliner Scott Gibson; hosted Jamie Dalgleish.
- 20:00 – 22:30 WEST Brewery Comedy Night WEST Brewery


text:
Treat your car's heart right. We have you covered when it comes to car battery service, replacement, and more at your Milwaukee Firestone Complete Auto Care.
We know battery health is vital when it comes to keeping your car in great shape. At your local Firestone Complete Auto Care in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, we offer the top car battery services, supported by only the best in parts and prices. From Interstate battery installation to free testing, our offerings guarantee that your car or truck will stay running strong through every season. We even include an examination of your battery in our complimentary car checkup. Not sure what kind of battery is right for your car? Our experienced ASE-certified auto technicians will know the correct type and size of battery, in addition to further care your car might need. It's all part of our total car care philosophy. After all, we promise our customers the very best in services and support. So whether you need a dead battery replaced or it's time for a full inspection, we'll equip your car for success. Come in to a Firestone Complete Auto Care in Milwaukee and take advantage of our battery services today.
Here at Firestone Complete Auto Care in Milwaukee, we do more than just under-the-hood auto work. We believe in total auto care, so whether you're in the market for Firestone tires, need truck transmission services, or want a full A/C performance check, count on us to take care of it. When you take your car or truck to a Firestone Complete Auto Care shop, our highly-qualified automotive technicians will identify exactly what your car needs while keeping you updated and educated every step of the way. Stop by your nearest location to learn more today.


text:
scroll to top
Stuck on your essay?
Get ideas from this essay and see how your work stacks up
1 Pages
What Does Good Writing Mean
Already a member? Login here
Pages: 1
Word Count: 733
Category: English
Word Count: 733
Pages: 1
Seeing through the clarity of deep cool blue ocean water Hearing the rattle of the tea kettle right before it lets out its impatient siren Smelling the tart sweetness of freshly pulled strawberry taffy Tasting the sensations of warm sips of chocolate as it overflows your mouth and tongue with a million different flavors and crazes Touching the dew on the tips of fresh cut grass in the dawn of spring morning Occasions like these are ones that we can take for granted in our every day lives However if written right it is also occasions like these that can take us out of a boring dull atmosphere and into a world of intensified sensations feelings and emotions A product of good writing does just that and more So when asked what good writing looks like look only as far as the author will let you go In order to develop the outcome of good writing you need to be able to revise your work to its best state clearly convey your ideas and build a belief in what your reader will take away from your piece It is almost certain that all writing in some form or another starts out as actually being something far from good However it is so important to make sure that as the author you dont leave it that way It is your duty to rewrite until you have an outcome of a purified and improved piece of work In both Winter Its Not All Its Cracked Up To Be and Fallow Fantasy it can be assured that these were not the authors rough drafts that were submitted Both of the authors may have had an idea of what they wanted to put down on paper however it can almost be guaranteed that time was taken to choose their wording carefully in order to depict everything in the right way In my own opinion I felt
@Kibin is a lifesaver for my essay right now!!
- Sandra Slivka, student @ UC Berkeley
Wow, this is the best essay help I've ever received!
- Camvu Pham, student @ U of M
If I'd known about @Kibin in college, I would have gotten much more sleep
- Jen Soust, alumni @ UCLA


text:
Camden Sotelo. 615 E Weber Dr, Tempe, AZ 85281 See your commute times. 1 - 2 Bedrooms. 1 - 2.5 full Bathrooms. Apartment.
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Digg MySpace Delicious Technorati Google Reddit. Close. Camden Sotelo. 615 E Weber Dr, Tempe, AZ 85281 Map.
Camden Doctors ...find local info, yellow pages, white pages, demographics and more using Areaconnect Camden.
Search All Doctors New-jersey Camden, NJ.
33.443400,-111.929700615 E Weber Dr, Tempe, Arizona 85281Camden Sotelo. At Camden Sotelo, in Tempe, Arizona, just minutes from Arizona State University, our 1 and 2 bedroom pet-friendly...
Camden Sotelo. 615 E Weber Dr Tempe, AZ 85281.
< back to search results. Camden Sotelo. 615 E Weber Dr, Tempe, AZ, 85281. add to favorites. print guest card.
615 E Weber Dr, Tempe, 85281, AZ.
GEORGE WEBER was born May 13, 1882 in Camden to John and Barbara Weber. The 1884-1885 City Directory shows the family at 712 Walnut Street. By 1898 John Weber had died.
Glass Doctor® of Camden County provides home, business and auto services to Merchantville, Cherry Hill and Pennsauken and surrounding areas.


text:
St.Stephen's Church
Weir Road, London, SW12 0NU
£2.50 plus 50p for additional child
30-Sep-16 to 30-Sep-21
Mon, 0930-1130
All ages
Aimed at parents and carers of newborns, crawlers and those attempting their first steps. Join us for refreshments and take the opportunity meet and chat with others going through the same experiences in a friendly and relaxed atmosphere. The babies will be able to enjoy some very gentle activities such as singing, soft play and stories aimed especially aimed at little ones.
Times and prices are subject to change. Contact venue before setting out.
Please login first.


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
decided: January 18, 1983.
KENNETH P. REESE, APPELLANTv.COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, APPELLEE
Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Kenneth P. Reese, No. 78 S 1935.
Samuel K. Gates, Frankel & Gates, for appellant.
Harold H. Cramer, Assistant Counsel, with him Ward T. Williams, Chief Counsel, Jay C. Waldman, General Counsel, and Francis P. Bach, for appellee.
President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges MacPhail and Doyle, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Doyle.
[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 245]
This is an appeal by Kenneth P. Reese (Appellant) from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County which affirmed the action of the Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety (Department) suspending and revoking Appellant's operating privileges.
On September 6, 1977, Appellant operated his vehicle in a manner which resulted in four separate convictions for violations of the Vehicle Code. On January 31, 1978, the Department issued a notice of a six-month suspension for Appellant's violation of Section 3734 of the Vehicle Code (Code).*fn1 On May 16, 1978, the Department issued an additional six-month suspension, pursuant to Section 1544(b) of the Code,*fn2 as a result of Appellant's conviction for violating
[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 246]
Section 3733 of the Code.*fn3 Thereafter, on June 9, 1978, the Department imposed an additional twenty-five day suspension for Appellant's violation of Section 3362 of the Code.*fn4 Finally, after receiving certification of a second conviction for violating Section 3734 of the Code, the Department issued a five-year revocation, pursuant to Section 1542 of the Code.*fn5 The suspensions ran consecutively and the revocation became effective immediately following the suspensions.*fn6
Appellant first questions the application of Section 1542 of the Code which in pertinent part provides:
(a) General rule. -- The department shall revoke the operating privileges of any person found to be a habitual offender pursuant to the provisions of this section. A "habitual offender" shall be any person whose driving record, as maintained in the department, shows that such person has accumulated the requisite number of convictions for the separate and distinct offenses described and enumerated in subsection (b) committed after the effective date of this title and within any period of five years thereafter.
[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 247]
(b) Offenses enumerated. -- Three convictions arising from separate acts of any one or more of the following offenses committed either singularly or in combination by any person shall result in such person being designated as a habitual offender. . . .
[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 248]
Of the three convictions required to gain habitual offender status,*fn7 two of Appellant's convictions concern the same conduct, i.e., driving without lights to avoid identification or arrest. These two convictions, both of which are the result of Appellant's actions on September 6, 1977, were entered by different jurisdictions. The Appellant drove without his headlights to avoid the police in each of two municipalities. Appellant argues that he does not come within the purview of Section 1542 because these convictions do not arise from separate acts as required by Subsection (b), as set forth above. We are not persuaded by this argument. Although there was but one episode, there were three acts which resulted in three convictions for violations enumerated by Section 1542 and this is sufficient to render the operator an habitual offender. Weaver v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Traffic Safety, 52 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 625, 416 A.2d 628 (1980); Brewster v. Department of Transportation, 52 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 112, 415 A.2d 922 (1980). These separate and distinct offenses are not merged into a single act merely because the Appellant's conduct occurred during one continuous episode. See Department of Transportation, Page 248} Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Auman, 59 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 468, 430 A.2d 373 (1981).
Appellant's second argument suggests that multiple suspensions for the same episode constitutes an abuse of discretion. We must also reject this argument as without merit. See, Weaver; Brewster.
Now, January 18, 1983, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County in the above referenced matter, dated February 5, 1980, is hereby affirmed.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Play Video
FedEx vs UPS: The Eternal Struggle
Posted by Fortey on Aug. 03, 2012
This week Odin will be showing you how build Cloud's Fusion Sword from Fina...
Who will come out on top as the best Star Wars character of all time?? Our ...
It's like every other cartoon!
Posted by Fortey on Aug. 03, 2012


text:
Turkish court dismisses case over 2010 Israeli flotilla raid - lawyer
ISTANBUL A Turkish court on Friday dismissed a case brought by victims of an Israeli raid on an aid flotilla that killed 10 people in 2010, said a lawyer for the victims' families, who stormed out of the courtroom as the judge ordered one co-plaintiff to be ejected.
Israeli forces kill Palestinian brandishing knife - police
Israeli paramilitary police officers in the occupied West Bank shot and killed a Palestinian who ran towards them brandishing a knife on Thursday, police said.
Netanyahu in high stakes gamble with new settlement bill
JERUSALEM Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's support for a bill that would legalise Israeli settlement homes on private Palestinian land in the West Bank is seen in Israel as another feint in a power struggle within his ruling right-wing coalition.
Israel's Netanyahu gives conditional 'No' to meeting Abbas in Paris
PARIS/JERUSALEM Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday that he had told French President Francois Hollande he would not meet Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas if France pushed ahead with an international peace conference in Paris later this month.
Golden 'King Bibi' statue causes guerrilla-art stir in Israel
TEL AVIV A gilded statue of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, dubbed "King Bibi" by its creator, stirred condemnation from Israel's culture minister and was toppled by an onlooker after a brief public appearance on Tuesday. | Video
Israeli legislators advance revised bill to legalise settlements
JERUSALEM Israel's parliament gave initial approval on Monday to a revised bill that would legalise Israeli settlement homes built on private Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank.
Netanyahu to discuss 'bad' Iran deal with Trump, Kerry stresses settlements
JERUSALEM/WASHINGTON Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday he would discuss with Donald Trump the West's "bad" nuclear deal with Iran after the U.S. president-elect enters the White House.
Iran urges Kenya to free two Iranians facing terrorism charges - Tasnim
ANKARA Iran urged Kenya on Friday to immediately release two Iranians charged with collecting information for a terrorist act after filming the Israeli Embassy in Nairobi, the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported.
Obama, trying to protect legacy, unlikely to act on Mideast peace
WASHINGTON U.S. President Barack Obama, keen to preserve his legacy on domestic health care and the Iran nuclear deal, is not expected to make major moves on Israeli-Palestinian peace before leaving office, U.S. officials said on Thursday.
On West Bank hilltop, Israeli settlers hunker down in the face of eviction
AMONA, West Bank On a hilltop in the occupied West Bank, Israeli teenagers are hammering stakes into the earth and erecting tent frames, preparing the ground for a confrontation with Israeli security forces.


text:
LONG BEACH - With the summer season just around the corner, the City of Long Beach released a Public Service Announcement teaching kids about the dangers of swimming when no lifeguards are on duty, but it appears the video will be without its intended audience.
Officials wanted to distribute the PSA to all of New York City's schools, but they have been told by educators that they have no plans to utilize the video.
"I think that that's really very, very, very unfortunate because as we've said, if this film only saves one life, it would be worth the effort," says Long Beach City Manager Charles Theofan.
As News 12 Long Island has reported, last year there were two deaths and several near-drownings that happened in Long Beach during the off-season when no lifeguards were on duty.
Theofan says this year, lifeguards will start working a week earlier on June 18.
For a news conference in Long Beach about preventing drownings, go to your digital cable box and select iO Extra on Ch. 612.
Long Beach Drowning Public Service Announcement


text:
Welcome Guest
Item Added In Your Basket
Item/s in your basket
Sub Total:
FREE Shipping On Orders Over $75
Items Added In Your Basket
Items in your basket
Click Image to Zoom
Item #: 17997007207 | Made By Wells St. by LANG
| Artwork By Susan Winget
In Stock
Pre-Order: Item Not Yet Available
Added to Cart
| Share
Decorate your home or office with the beautiful and practical Folk Song 2017 Note Nook featuring artwork by renowned artist Susan Winget! Enjoy dual pockets with a unique artistic design each month as you store cards, bills, coupons and more. The Folk Song Note Nook features a handy wall calendar with ample room to take notes and arrange your schedule. Each pocket is decorated with uplifting artwork and matches the color scheme of the rest of the calendar!
Arrives in 6-8 Business Days.
Only registered users can write reviews. Please, log in or register
View All Artist Collections!
Please wait...


text: At what point did emojis jump the shark, ceasing to be clever or new? At what point did we, as consumers, get sick to death of brands turning up late at the party, shouting 'Hey, we brought emojis!' only to be greeted with a forlorn and disappointed shake of the head.


text:
VA - Goa Session Vol.3 (Compiled By Sonic Species) (2015)
- 18-02-2015, 10:42
- Music | Electronic | Trance | Psychedelic | Progressive
Artist: VA
Title Of Album: Goa Session Vol.3 (Compiled By Sonic Species)
Year Of Release: 07 February, 2015
Label: Yellow Sunshine Explosion
Genre: Progressive, Psy Trance
Quality: Mp3
Bitrate: 320 kbps
Total Time: 02:24:04 min
Total Size: 447 mb
WebSite: Psyshop
01. Tristan & Outsiders - Force Of Nature 07:32
02. Killerwatts & Waio - Wake Up (Symbolic Remix) 07:44
03. Sonic Species - Just Another Freak 06:51
04. Sonic Species Vs. Burn in Noise - Sonic Noise 09:01
05. Mental Broadcast Vs. Faders - Psychedelic Theory 06:08
06. Tristan - Enlightenment 07:19
07. Outsiders Vs. Burn In Noise - Burning Out 08:08
08. Laughing Buddha Vs. Avalon - Bring It 08:10
09. Sonic Species Vs. Mental Broadcast - Receiver (Killerwatts Remix) 07:46
01. Sonic Species - Tokyo Sunrise 07:50
02. Tristan Vs. Mad Maxx - Bhahavaskar 07:37
03. Brainiac & Burn In Noise - The Healer 07:27
04. Sinerider Vs. Sonic Species - Alien 08:06
05. Sonic Species - Zero - (Outsiders Remix) 06:59
06. Future Frequency Vs. Zen Mechanics - Naked, Stoned & Exalted 09:23
07. Sonic Species Vs. Zen Mechanics - Spice Travel 09:43
08. Dickster - Dizzy Drops (Sonic Species Remix) 09:20
09. Future Frequency - Into The Future 08:50
After the 2nd release of our new 'Goa Session' Series with 'Liquid Soul', we bring you the ever...anticipated third round! As he endeavors to open his magic musical treasure chest for us, this time nobody could do it better than England's world renowned producer Joseph Markendale aka 'Sonic Species and Future Frequency'. Providing to us his undivided attention to present you with 2 CD's. An overview of his real taste and knowledge into our psychedelic trance scene. The result is a fantastic journey into our World deep psychedelic trance. Included are some of his latest productions and collaboration works with Burn in Noise, Zen Mechanics and Sinerider. As well tracks from well known producers like Tristan, Outsiders, Symbolic, Mental Broadcast vs Faders, Laughing Buddha vs. Avalon, Killerwatts, Bouncerz, Mad Maxx and Brainiac. The result is 140 minutes of a deep Sonic journey into the Mind of a unique Artist. For us it is a real pleasure to present you this outstanding 347th Release on Y.S.E. Enjoy!
- Tired of advertising and pop-ups? Join Now on IsraBox
Register on IsraBox allows you to access to the full resources. You can see torrent links, leave your comments, see hidden text, minimum advertising (no pop-ups), ask for supports and much more.
- 3 voted