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.
Illinois Court of Appeals, District 1 FOURTH DIVISION
March 29, 2012
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.CORNELL BRISCO,DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County No. 09 CR 17970 Honorable John J. Moran, Judge Presiding.
JUSTICE STERBA delivered the judgment of the court, with opinion. Justices Fitzgerald Smith and Pucinski concurred in the judgment and opinion.
¶ 1 Defendant Cornell Brisco was charged by information with four counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2008)) and two counts of unlawful use of a weapon by a felon (720 ILCS5/24-1.1(a) (West 2008)). Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted on all counts and sentenced to 11 years in prison on the first count of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (AUUW). On appeal, defendant contends that the State failed to prove him guilty of AUUW beyond a reasonable doubt where the statute under which he was charged had been amended at the time the crime was committed and where defendant fell under the invitee exception to the amended statute. Alternatively, defendant contends that the trial judge was not a neutral arbiter where the judge referenced defendant's eligibility for a Class X sentence in response to defendant's questions. Defendant also contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel where his attorney failed to bring pretrial motions to quash arrest and suppress evidence and was denied his right to counsel of his choice when the trial court required his chosen attorney for posttrial proceedings to become familiar with the case within two weeks as a condition of approving the motion for substitution. Next, defendant contends the trial court's imposition of an 11-year sentence was excessive in light of the character of defendant's prior offenses and his attempts at rehabilitation. Defendant also contends the statute for AUUW is unconstitutional under the second amendment. Finally, defendant contends that the trial court erred in imposing a three-year term of mandatory supervised release (MSR) attaching to Class X felonies when defendant was found guilty of a Class 2 offense, which attaches only a two-year term of MSR. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, but vacate the sentence and remand for new posttrial proceedings.
¶ 3 This case arises out of events occurring on September 22, 2009, when defendant was arrested in the basement apartment of 1545 North Lorel Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. Defendant was charged with four counts of AUUW and two counts of unlawful use of a weapon by a felon. Specifically, count I of the information charged defendant with AUUW, alleging defendant: "knowingly carried on or about his person, a firearm, at a time when he was not on his own land or in his own abode or fixed place of business and the firearm possessed was uncased, loaded, and immediately accessible at the time of offense, and he had been previously convicted of a felony."
¶ 4 In November 2009, a conference pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 402, (Ill. S. Ct. R. 402 (eff. July 1, 1997)) was held, and defendant was offered a seven year sentence in exchange for a guilty plea. At a hearing held several months later, defendant inquired through counsel why he was eligible for Class X sentencing. The trial court responded that defendant was Class X because of his background, which included prior Class 2 felonies. The court recounted defendant's 2002 conviction for harassing a juror or witness, his 2004 conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, and also referred to a charge of possession of a controlled substance. At that point, the State interjected, saying "Judge, I don't have this as a Class X." The trial court responded that it was basing its recollection on what was indicated at the Rule 402 conference, but then checked the charging instrument. There, it found that because the State had not used the 2007 possession of a controlled substance conviction to enhance the current charge, but instead used the 2002 harassment conviction, defendant could not be subject to Class X sentencing.
¶ 5 After the case was passed to allow the parties to re-enter a conference, defendant was again offered seven years, this time under Class 2 sentencing which ranges from a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 14 years. The trial court cautioned defendant that if he chose not to accept this offer, there was a risk the State would cure the "deficiency" in the charging document, resulting in Class X sentencing. Defendant rejected the offer of seven years, whereupon the State sought leave to amend the charging instruments to comport with the preliminary hearing transcript, which indicated defendant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance. The court granted the State's motion to amend over defendant's objection.
¶ 6 The State's evidence at trial established that on September 22, 2009, at around midnight, Chicago police officer Vince Stinar and his partner were driving in an unmarked vehicle in the area of 1545 North Lorel Avenue when they saw two men in the street near the mouth of an alley. One man was on a bicycle with his hands in the air, while another man, later identified as defendant, stood five feet away, facing the man on the bike.
¶ 7 Officer Stinar testified at trial that while he was driving towards the men's location, defendant looked in the direction of the officer's vehicle and ran into a side entrance of an immediately adjacent building. As Officer Stinar pursued defendant into the building, he noticed a large object in defendant's hands. Once inside the building's first-floor apartment, Officer Stinar saw defendant drop a rifle while running through the building and out the door. Officer Stinar recovered the rifle and placed it in the trunk of the police vehicle, while his partner observed defendant return to the building and proceed to the basement. After back-up units arrived to assist, Officer Stinar entered the basement and found defendant hiding behind a stack of boxes and placed him under arrest.
¶ 8 Defendant testified that on the evening of September 22, 2009, he was sleeping in his friend Gregory's basement apartment at 1545 North Lorel Avenue. According to defendant, he had known Gregory for several years, though he did not know his last name. Defendant testified he first saw the police when they woke him out of his sleep, handcuffed him, and dragged him out of the apartment. Defendant denied having a rifle at any time during the night of his arrest.
¶ 9 The court found defendant guilty on all counts and continued the matter for further proceedings. One month after trial, on June 2, 2010, when the case was first up for post-trial motions and sentencing, counsel Irving Federman requested leave to enter an appearance for defendant for the purpose of post-trial motions. Federman requested time to supplement the pending motion for a new trial filed by defendant's court-appointed attorney and to review the transcript. The court immediately denied the motion, but then held a discussion off the record. Back on the record, the court revealed the results of a scheduling conference with Federman, stating that Federman was scheduled for surgery on June 21, and the court would be retiring effective July 1. Therefore, the court offered Federman the opportunity to appear if he could be ready by June 15, but noted the impossibility of obtaining a trial transcript by that date. Federman ultimately asked for leave to withdraw his appearance and the case was continued for the following day.
¶ 10 The next day, the court denied defendant's motion for a new trial and heard from defendant at the sentencing hearing. Defendant stated he had received a certificate in janitor and correction maintenance during his prior incarceration. Arguing further in mitigation, defendant pointed out he had not fathered any children and had several extended-family members visiting him regularly. The trial court imposed a sentence of 11 years with a 3-year term of MSR. Defendant filed a motion to reconsider the sentence, which the trial court denied. Defendant timely filed this appeal.
¶ 12 A. Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt
¶ 13 Defendant first contends that he was charged and convicted on counts I and II under an earlier version of the AUUW statute that had been amended by the time of his offense. As this issue was not raised either at trial or in a posttrial motion, we review for plain error. See People v. McLaurin, 235 Ill. 2d 478, 485 (2009). This doctrine allows a reviewing court to consider otherwise unpreserved issues on appeal if the evidence is closely balanced or the error so seriously affects the integrity of the judicial process that it denies the defendant his right to a fair trial. People v. Santiago, 409 Ill. App. 3d 927, 930-31 (2011). Defendant argues this error affected his substantial rights, namely, the prohibition on convicting a defendant for a crime that does not exist. See People v. Wasson, 175 Ill. App. 3d 851, 854 (1988). Before turning to the merits of this contention, we must first determine whether an error occurred.
¶ 14 Where the sufficiency of a charging instrument is attacked for the first time on appeal, we must review the indictment or information to ascertain if it apprised the defendant of the offense charged with sufficient specificity to: (1) allow preparation of his defense; and (2) allow pleading a resulting conviction or acquittal as a bar to future prosecution. People v. DiLorenzo, 169 Ill. 2d 318, 322 (1996); see also People v. Gutierrez, 402 Ill. App. 3d 866, 890 (2010). "Thus, the question is whether, in light of the facts of record, the indictment was so imprecise as to prejudice defendant's ability to prepare a defense." People v. Phillips, 215 Ill. 2d 554, 562 (2005).
¶ 15 Here, counts I and II of the information charged defendant under unamended section 24-1.6(a)(1) of the Criminal Code of 1961, defining the offense of AUUW and providing, in relevant part, that a person commits the offense of AUUW when he or she knowingly:
"(1) Carries on or about his or her person or in any vehicle or concealed on or about his or her person except when on his or her land or in his or her abode or fixed place of business any pistol, revolver, stun gun or taser or other firearm[.]" 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2008).
The amended statute, which went into effect on August 25, 2009, one month before the crime was committed, mirrors the first portion of the original statute but adds the phrase "or on the land or in the legal dwelling of another person as an invitee with that person's permission" to the exception clause. 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2010).
¶ 16 It is readily apparent that counts I and II of the information omit any mention of defendant's status, or lack thereof, as an invitee, which is a necessary element of the offense of AUUW after August 25, 2009. While elements missing from one count of a multiple-count indictment may be supplied by other counts (People v. Morris, 135 Ill. 2d 540, 544 (1990)), no other counts of the information properly allege this element. Instead, counts III and IV, also charging AUUW, allege defendant knowingly possessed a firearm "at a time when he was not on his own land, or in his own abode or fixed place of business and when he was not an invitee thereon for the purpose of display of such weapon or the lawful commerce in weapons." (Emphasis added.) The element of being an invitee on the land of another is distinct from the element of being an invitee on one's own land, abode, or fixed place of business for the specific purpose of displaying a weapon or engaging in weapons commerce, which was set forth in counts III and IV.
¶ 17 Although this omission in counts I and II clearly rendered the information imprecise, defendant cannot show it prejudiced his ability to prepare a defense. Indeed, defendant makes no attempt to show prejudice, instead arguing that such a showing is unnecessary because the offense with which he was charged did not exist. However, the case defendant cites for this proposition, People v. Tellez-Valencia, 188 Ill. 2d 523, 527 (1999), is inapposite. There, the statute under which the defendants were charged and convicted was held unconstitutional while their appeals were pending. Id. at 524. Accordingly, the offense was void ab initio and the indictment contained a fatal, substantive defect, which hindered preparation of the defense. See id. at 526-27; see also Wasson, 175 Ill. App. 3d at 854-55 (where the defendant was "forced to answer to crimes for which he could not have been lawfully convicted" he could not adequately prepare a defense).
¶ 18 Here, in contrast, the offense of AUUW was in existence before, during and after the time defendant committed the crime, but in a somewhat different form. Defendant has failed to show how the indictment's failure to negate an exception contained in the amendment hindered his ability to mount an effective defense. Specifically, because defendant testified he never had a rifle the night he was arrested, he was not prejudiced by a failure to gather evidence countering any argument by the State that he did not possess the rifle as an invitee on the land of another. See People v. Davis, 82 Ill. 2d 534, 539 (1980) (the defendant was not prejudiced by indictment's misidentification of the person whom he made threats against, as his defense was that he never made threats); People v. Gudgel, 183 Ill. App. 3d 881, 884 (1989) (where indictment misidentified from whom the defendant received notice to leave premises, the defendant was not prejudiced because his defense was that he was never told to leave by anyone).
¶ 19 People v. Grant, 57 Ill. 2d 264, 269 (1974), is also instructive. There, the defendant, charged with unlawful use of a weapon, challenged the complaint's failure to allege that at the time he had the weapon, he was not in his own abode, a necessary element of the crime. Id. The reviewing court did not find the defendant suffered prejudice from this omission because the defendant's testimony belied his contention that he was not aware the State had to prove he was not in his own abode. Id. The defendant testified he resided in the place where he was arrested and provided an explanation as to why he had given a different address at the time of his arrest. Id.
¶ 20 Similarly, here, defendant's own testimony suggests he was aware the State needed to prove he was not an invitee. Defendant repeatedly testified that he was on the premises as an overnight guest of his friend. In particular, he provided details as to the time he arrived, his reason for spending the night, and the duration of the friendship. It follows that defendant could not have been prejudiced by the failure of the indictment to specifically allege that he was not an invitee at the time he possessed the rifle, and this is not grounds for reversal of defendant's conviction.
¶ 21 In the alternative, defendant contends he was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt where the State failed to introduce evidence he was not an invitee on the premises of 1545 North Loral Avenue. A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence does not permit the reviewing court to retry the defendant, but instead requires the court to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Ross, 229 Ill. 2d 255, 272 (2008).
¶ 22 The State acknowledges it was required to prove defendant was not an invitee as an element of the offense of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (cf. People v. Price, 375 Ill. App. 3d 684, 687 (2007)), but argues it has met its burden. We agree. Viewed in the light most favorable to the State, there was some evidence that, if believed by a rational finder of fact, could support the conclusion that defendant was not an invitee on the premises where he possessed the rifle. Specifically, Officer Stinar's testimony at trial, which the court found credible, revealed that after he observed defendant standing in front of a man on a bicycle with his hands in the air, he saw defendant run into an adjacent building carrying a large object in his hands. As he chased defendant into the building, Officer Stinar testified he saw defendant drop a rifle. It was reasonable for the trier of fact to conclude that the "large object" in defendant's hands outside the building was the rifle he dropped moments later inside the first-floor apartment. Because defendant possessed the rifle while on a public street, the trial court could legitimately conclude he was not an invitee falling within the exception to the amended AUUW statute. Likewise, the court reasonably found Officer Stinar's testimony that defendant was discovered crouched behind boxes in a basement apartment inconsistent with and more credible than defendant's claim he was on the premises as an invited guest. This conclusion is further bolstered by defendant's own testimony that he did not know the last name of his friend of over two years with whom he was staying that evening. Taken together, we conclude the evidence reasonably supports a finding that defendant was not an invitee on the premises when he possessed the rifle.
¶ 23 B. Trial Court Bias
¶ 24 Defendant next contends that the trial court did not act as a neutral arbiter when it explained how defendant could have been subject to Class X sentencing at a hearing in the presence of the prosecution. The exchange which defendant complains of begins as follows:
"MS. BURAN [Defense Attorney]: Judge, the conference on November 18th the offer was seven. Mr. Briscoe would like the Court to explain -- I know the Court has explained before -- why he is a Class X. He believes he only is three to 14. I know the Court has explained to him before that it's because of his background.
THE COURT: For the last time, in 2002 harassing a juror or witness was finding of guilty, boot camp followed by 42 months IDOC. That's a class two felony. Then in 2004, delivery of controlled substance, you received probation. That was a class two felony. This is charged as a class two felony. What about the PCS? There was a PCS. Let me double check the year of the indictment.
MS. BROWN [Assistant State's Attorney]: Judge, I don't have this as Class X.
THE COURT: That is what was indicated at the conference. Checking the charging document, it could be if the State had used the '07 PCS to enhance the gun charge, but since they used the '02 case, then in that case if it remains as it is, that would be a double enhancement, in which case he is only extendable, not X-able." (Emphasis added.)
The case was then passed for reconference at defendant's request, and when the court reconvened, it cautioned defendant that if he refused to accept the seven years now offered under Class 2 sentencing, he ran the risk the State would "cure the deficiency" of the charging document and charge him as Class X. Subsequently, the State moved to do exactly that, stating that a review of the preliminary hearing transcript revealed the charging instrument before the court did not comport with the preliminary hearing, which indicated defendant was convicted in 2007 of possession of a controlled substance. The court granted the State's motion to "amend the charging instrument to conform with the preliminary hearing testimony" over defendant's objection.
¶ 25 Later during the hearing, when defendant directly queried the court as to why the sentence he was facing had changed, the court answered:
"I explained to you why it was that there was that confusion. I was confused also until I looked at the charging document. Then I explained to you what happened. I heard your attorney *** that the charge in the charging document, an offense that was already -- your first one, the harassment of a witness, but based on that it would not have been X-able because they already used a class two against you. They can't use it twice. That's double enhancement. That's why there was that confusion. That's why we re-conferenced it. Then when you rejected that, the State then cured the defect by saying they did use the possession of controlled substance at the preliminary hearing and there was a typographical error in the preparation of the charging document and we want to amend that to conform with what was actually the evidence at the preliminary hearing, and that's exactly what I said to you that they might do if you decided to go to trial, that they would cure that defect, and that's exactly what they did."
¶ 26 As an initial matter, defendant concedes he did not raise an objection to the trial judge's statements either during the hearing or in posttrial motions, which ordinarily forfeits appellate review. See McLaurin, 235 Ill. 2d at 485. While we may relax the forfeiture rule where the basis for the objection is the trial judge's conduct (People v. Kliner, 185 Ill. 2d 81, 161 (1998)), we decline to do so here.
¶ 27 The reasoning behind relaxing the forfeiture doctrine in cases of judicial misconduct was first articulated in People v. Sprinkle, 27 Ill. 2d 398, 400 (1963), where the supreme court explained the potential embarrassment trial lawyers may face when objecting to a judge's conduct in the presence of a jury. The Sprinkle principle has since been expanded to include situations where no jury is present, but where it nevertheless appears objecting would have been futile. See People v. Davis, 378 Ill. App. 3d 1, 10 (2007). However, the supreme court recently stressed the importance of requiring trial counsel to raise contemporaneous objections in order to conserve time and judicial resources, and cautioned that the failure to do so "can be excused only under extraordinary circumstances, such as when a trial judge makes inappropriate remarks to a jury [citation] or relies on social commentary, rather than evidence, in sentencing a defendant to death [citation]." McLaurin, 235 Ill. 2d at 488.
¶ 28 The conduct in the case sub judice falls far short of the "extraordinary circumstances" required to relax the forfeiture rule. The trial judge responded to defendant's question as to why he was Class X by recounting defendant's prior history aloud. Upon an interruption by the State that "they did not have this as Class X," the court explained that the misunderstanding arose based on a representation made at the Rule 402 conference and went on to state that while defendant's prior history made him Class X eligible, the charging instrument did not in fact reflect this. Not only did this exchange take place outside the presence of the jury, but defendant does not point to any evidence in the record that an attempt to object at that point would have "fallen on deaf ears," a necessary precondition to application of the Sprinkle rule. See Davis, 378 Ill. App. 3d at 10.
¶ 29 Because we find these circumstances do not necessitate relaxation of the waiver rule, we next consider defendant's contention that we should view his claim of judicial bias as plain error. Defendant argues only the second prong of the plain error doctrine is implicated here, contending that bias on the part of the trial judge interfered with his right to due process of law. See Bracy v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899, 904-05 (1997). In order to show bias as a basis for reversal, defendant has the burden of demonstrating the existence of active personal animosity, hostility, ill will or distrust towards him. People v. Shelton, 401 Ill. App. 3d 564, 583 (2010). No such showing has been made here.
¶ 30 Viewed in context, the court's statements do not show bias but instead reflect the court's attempt, prompted by defendant's questions, to reconcile the representations made at the conference and during the preliminary hearing with the allegations in the charging document. The fact that these statements alerted the State to the error in the charging document was an unintended consequence and cannot be said to be a product of personal hostility toward defendant. Moreover, the fact that the court took the time to provide two detailed explanations to defendant as to why the sentencing parameters had changed is further evidence that the court bore defendant no ill will.
¶ 31 Nor do we find any evidence the judge assumed the role of an advocate, as this court found in People v. Kuntz, 239 Ill. App. 3d 587 (1993), cited by defendant. There, the trial judge "prompted the State to seek a continuance and present additional evidence." Id. at 592. In contrast, the trial judge here did not urge the State to seek Class X sentencing, but pointed out an inconsistency between the charging document and what was brought forth at the preliminary hearing and Rule 402 conference. This was not an attempt to increase defendant's sentence, but a good faith effort to mitigate the court's own confusion and respond to defendant's request for clarification. Because no bias is apparent, there is no error that would result in reversal of defendant's conviction.
¶ 32 C. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
¶ 33 Defendant additionally contends he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel when his trial attorney failed to file a motion to quash his arrest and suppress evidence of the rifle. The two-pronged test to establish ineffective assistance of counsel sets a high standard. People v. Baines, 399 Ill. App. 3d 881, 887 (2010). Defendant must demonstrate that his representation was so unprofessional as to fall below an objective standard of reasonableness and that he was prejudiced by his counsel's performance. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). Though both prongs of this test must be satisfied in order for defendant to prevail on his claim, a reviewing court has the option of beginning its analysis under either prong, and, if it finds the standard for that prong is not satisfied, it need not consider the remaining prong. People v. Irvine, 379 Ill. App. 3d 116, 129-30 (2008). Where an ineffective assistance claim is based on defense counsel's failure to file a motion to quash and suppress, to prove prejudice, defendant must show there was a reasonable probability the motion would have been granted and the outcome of trial would have been different had the evidence been suppressed. People v. Patterson, 217 Ill. 2d 407, 438 (2005). The decision of whether to file a motion to suppress is often one of trial strategy, which "seldom [has] any bearing on issues of incompetency of counsel." People v. Mendez, 221 Ill. App. 3d 868, 873 (1991).
¶ 34 Here, defendant argues Officer Stinar's warrantless entry into the residence was not justified under the fourth amendment and a motion to quash arrest and suppress the rifle recovered from the entry should have been filed on that basis. Initially, the State counters that defendant lacked standing to object to the search. It is well settled that a defendant must have a "legitimate expectation of privacy" in the area searched in order to object to the search. Rawlings v. Kentucky, 448 U.S. 98, 104 (1980) (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Defendant cites his testimony that he was an overnight guest in his friend's basement apartment as evidence of his privacy interest in that apartment (see Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91, 96-97 (1990)), but the majority of the evidence contradicts this testimony. Defendant admitted he did not know his friend's last name, despite knowing him for two years. Additionally, Officer Stinar testified his partner only saw defendant enter the basement apartment after fleeing from the scene. Later, Officer Stinar found defendant hiding behind boxes in the basement, which was being rehabbed. Based on the trial court's finding of guilt, it can be inferred that it found Officer Stinar's account of that night more credible than defendant's. Given this credibility determination, it was not reasonably probable a motion to quash arrest and suppress evidence would have been successful, and defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim must fail. See People v. Lundy, 334 Ill. App. 3d 819, 831 (2002) (where trial court implicitly found officer's testimony credible in finding the defendant guilty, a motion to quash arrest based on the "unbelievability" of officer's testimony would have been futile).
¶ 35 Even assuming arguendo it was probable the trial court would have found defendant had standing to challenge this search and seizure, we find a motion to quash the arrest and suppress the evidence would nevertheless have been futile, as there was certainly probable cause to effect the arrest and exigent circumstances justifying the warrantless entry into the residence. Probable cause to arrest exists where facts known to the officer would lead a reasonably cautious person to believe the arrestee had committed a crime. People v. Wear, 229 Ill. 2d 545, 563 (2008). While suspicion alone is inadequate to establish probable cause, the evidence relied on by the arresting officer need not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. People v. Sims, 192 Ill. 2d 592, 614-15 (2000). A warrantless entry must also be justified by exigent circumstances. People v. Adams, 394 Ill. App. 3d 217, 224 (2009). Factors establishing exigent circumstances may include: (1) the commission of a grave or violent offense; (2) the suspect was reasonably believed to be armed; (3) the entry was peaceful; (4) there was a possibility the suspect would escape if not apprehended swiftly; (5) the crime under investigation had been recently committed; and (6) the police had reason to believe the suspect was on the premises. People v. Morgan, 388 Ill. App. 3d 252, 270 (2009).
¶ 36 In the case at bar, the testimony of Officer Stinar, credited by the trial court, establishes both probable cause and exigent circumstances justifying the search and seizure. Officer Stinar testified that during a patrol with his partner he saw defendant standing in front of a man on a bicycle who had his hands in the air. The position of the men could have alerted the officers to the possibility a crime was being committed, as raising one's hands in such a manner is a well- known reaction by a victim of a robbery. See, e.g., People v. Bell, 209 Ill. App. 3d 438, 442 (1991) (robber ordered victim to "stand against the wall with his hands up"); People v. Crespo, 118 Ill. App. 3d 815, 816 (1983) (in armed robbery of tavern, defendant ordered everyone to put their hands up). Though there was no evidence defendant had told the man on the bike to raise his hands, this is a reasonable inference when one considers that the two men were facing each other on an otherwise deserted street at midnight. Further, while Officer Stinar did not see anything in defendant's hands as he faced the man on the bicycle, Officer Stinar explicitly testified he saw a large object in defendant's hands before he entered the residence. Standing alone, none of these facts may be sufficient to show probable cause, but taken together, they establish the reasonable probability defendant committed a crime.
¶ 37 A number of exigent circumstances were also present justifying the officers' entry into the house. First, Officer Stinar reasonably believed defendant was armed, as he saw a large object in defendant's hands moments after witnessing what appeared to be a possible attempted robbery. Also, because defendant was running from the sound of the vehicle, it was possible he would escape if not apprehended. The police certainly had reason to believe defendant was on the premises before their entry, as they observed defendant enter through the side door. Finally, there is no evidence the officers' entry was less than peaceful. Viewed as a whole, these circumstances suggest the entry was lawful, and therefore, a motion to quash and suppress would likely have been unsuccessful. As a result, we reject defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
¶ 38 D. Motion to Substitute
¶ 39 Defendant further contends the trial court erred in denying his motion to substitute counsel for posttrial proceedings unless defendant's chosen counsel could prepare for sentencing and posttrial motions within two weeks. On June 2, the date scheduled for posttrial motions and sentencing, attorney Irving Federman asked leave to file an appearance for defendant and represent him for purposes of the motion for a new trial. Federman asked for additional time to supplement the motion that had been filed by the public defender. The trial court initially denied his motion, then went off the record for a scheduling conference. When the court reconvened, the following exchange took place:
"THE COURT: The record will reflect that we've had a scheduling conference with Mr. Federman, and the problem is Mr. Federman has a surgery scheduled for June 21st. He's going to be tied up. It's going to a take a while to get a transcript from this trial in any matter, and this Court will not be presiding -- will be retired effectively July 1st. I've offered Mr. Federman the opportunity, if he can do everything he needs to do by June 15, I would be happy to allow him to substitute in. Especially the need for a transcript on his part, that's not going to be possible.
MR. FEDERMAN: There was another issue too because I would probably have to do some investigation also in terms of possible witnesses and things of that nature too. That would take some time also.
THE COURT: We'll go ahead with the post-trial motions, if necessary, sentencing. And if you want to represent him on post-conviction proceedings or appellate matters --
MR. FEDERMAN: I'll ask leave to withdraw my appearance at this time though ***."
¶ 40 This colloquy reveals that the court's allowance of a two-week continuance had the practical effect of denying the motion to substitute altogether, as the court recognized the impossibility of obtaining the trial transcript by that date. See, e.g., People v. Willis, 6 Ill. App. 3d 980, 981 (1972) (court's refusal to allow defendant's chosen counsel to substitute in on the day of trial unless he could arrive at court within 30 minutes, when counsel resided 175 miles away, amounted to denial of motion to substitute).
¶ 41 A defendant's sixth amendment right to counsel includes a right to counsel of his choice. United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140, 147-48 (2006); see also People v. Ephraim, 411 Ill. 118, 120 (1952). However, this right is measured against the trial court's interest in trying the case with diligence and the orderly process of judicial administration. People v. Tucker, 382 Ill. App. 3d 916, 920 (2008). Therefore, the trial court may consider the defendant's reasons for seeking new counsel, whether the request is merely a guise to thwart effective prosecution, whether the defendant has cooperated with current counsel, and the length of time the defendant has been represented by current counsel. Id.; see also People v. Childress, 276 Ill. App. 3d 402, 411 (1995). A trial court's decision on a motion to substitute is subject to review for an abuse of discretion. People v. Montgomery, 373 Ill. App. 3d 1104, 1110 (2007) (quoting People v. Segoviano, 189 Ill. 2d 228, 245 (2000)). The trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion if chosen counsel is not specifically identified or does not stand "ready, willing and able" to enter an appearance. People v. Burrell, 228 Ill. App. 3d 133, 142 (1992).
¶ 42 The State argues denial was proper because defendant's chosen counsel was not ready or able to enter the case prior to the court's retirement. Initially, the State points to the well established preference for the judge who presided over trial to decide posttrial motions and impose sentences. However, we note that this preference is limited to situations where the judge remains sitting as a judge on the court. 730 ILCS 5/5-4-1(b)(West 2008). The State cites no case recognizing a trial court's interest in being available to rule on posttrial motions as greater than defendant's right to counsel of his choice, particularly where, as here, the trial court made no finding that defendant's request was dilatory or lacking in good faith.
¶ 43 While we allowed the State leave to cite Martel v. Clair, No. 10-1265, slip op. at 1 (U.S. Mar. 5, 2012), as additional authority, we do not find that case applicable here. The Supreme Court in Martel applied the "interests of justice" standard to a habeus defendant's motion to replace appointed counsel. Id. Under that standard, along with the timeliness of the motion, courts evaluate the defendant's complaints regarding his current appointed counsel, and specifically consider the cause for the complaints and the extent of the breakdown in communication between the lawyer and client. Id. at 13, see also United States v. Prime, 431 F.3d 1147, 1154 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Doe, 272 F. 3d 116, 122-123 (2nd Cir. 2001). These factors are plainly distinguishable from those we consider where a defendant makes a motion to substitute counsel with his own private attorney. See, e.g. Tucker, 382 Ill. App. 3d at 920.
¶ 44 Perhaps more significantly, the facts of Martel are also inapposite. There, the defendant made his motion to replace his appointed counsel 10 years into habeus proceedings, after the trial court had held an evidentiary hearing, reviewed posttrial briefs, and instructed the parties that no further submissions would be accepted. Martel, No. 10-1265, slip op. at 13, 15. Here, in contrast, defendant moved to substitute counsel when his case was first before the court for posttrial motions. The trial court had neither requested briefing nor heard argument on any motion for posttrial relief. For these reasons, we find Martel wholly inapposite from the case at bar.
¶ 45 We turn next to the State's argument that Federman was not ready or able to make an entry into the case due to his upcoming surgery and his resulting need for a continuance. However, merely because defendant's chosen counsel requires a continuance to become prepared, it does not follow that counsel is not willing and able to make an entry into the case. We agree with defendant that Childress isinstructive. There, on the day of trial, private counsel appeared in court asking leave to file an appearance on the defendant's behalf. Childress, 276 Ill. App. 3d at 410. Because counsel was unaware trial was scheduled for that day, he requested a continuance. Id. The trial court denied counsel's request because all witnesses were present in court and the public defender was prepared to proceed. Id. This court reversed, despite the fact that there had been 14 prior continuances, noting specifically that defense counsel was ready, willing, and able to enter an appearance. Id. at 413.
¶ 46 Here, the facts are even stronger. Not only was defense counsel present in court and ready to file an appearance, but there is no evidence defendant previously made any motions for continuance. Indeed, June 2 was the first time defendant's case was before the court for posttrial motions. Given that defendant's trial concluded only one month previously, and defendant was incarcerated during this time, the delay in obtaining new counsel did not reflect a lack of diligence on defendant's part. Moreover, unlike the defendant in Childress, who gave no reason for seeking private counsel (Childress, 276 Ill. App. 3d at 414 (Egan, J., dissenting)), defendant here had previously expressed dissatisfaction with his court appointed counsel, stating she failed to keep him informed and did not allow him to look at discovery. Nevertheless, he continued to cooperate with her, which is a relevant factor in determining whether a motion to substitute should be granted. See Tucker, 382 Ill. App. 3d at 920.
¶ 47 While counsel did request additional time to become prepared, this fact, standing alone, has never been held a sufficient basis to effectively deny a motion to substitute. This is particularly true where the trial court did not even inquire as to the length of time counsel would need. As such, we find this case distinguishable from United States v. Hughey, 147 F.3d 423 (5th Cir. 1998), relied upon by the State. There, the court denied defense counsel's request for an indefinite continuance in order to participate in a trial for a different matter. Id. at427. Significantly, in Hughey, the need for the continuance was a result of defense counsel's own scheduling errors and decision to take on another matter after having notice of the trial date. Id. at 430. In contrast, Federman's need for a continuance was due to the work he had to undertake in order to prepare for the posttrial motion, including locating witnesses and obtaining the trial transcript.
¶ 48 We are mindful that a trial court's discretion in matters of substitution and scheduling should ordinarily not be disturbed, but find the circumstances present in this case necessitate reversal of the court's decision. Accordingly, we vacate defendant's sentence and remand for new posttrial proceedings, and, if necessary, sentencing.
¶ 49 Because we vacate defendant's sentence, we need not consider the argument that the sentence was excessive; however, we will address defendant's remaining two claims of error since the issues may arise upon remand.
¶ 50 E. Constitutionality of Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon Statute
¶ 51 Defendant argues that the AUUW statute that he was convicted under is unconstitutional in light of the United States Supreme Court's rulings in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. , 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010), regarding an individual's second amendment right to bear arms. Whether a statute is constitutional is a question of law to be reviewed de novo. People v. Morgan, 203 Ill. 2d 470, 486 (2003). Defendant maintains that the AUUW statute is unconstitutional both on its face and as applied to him, given that there is no evidence he possessed the rifle in the apartment for an unlawful purpose. We disagree on both counts.
¶ 52 Our analysis necessarily begins with a discussion of the holdings in Heller and McDonald. Turning first to Heller, there, the Supreme Court struck down a District of Columbia statute imposing a total ban on the possession of handguns in the home, reasoning that the "inherent right of self-defense" lies at the core of the second amendment and the home in particular was where the need for such defense was "most acute." 554 U.S. at 628. Therefore, the Court held this prohibition failed to pass constitutional muster. Id. Turning next to McDonald, the Court struck down similar Chicago municipal ordinances, holding that the second amendment applied to states through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment. 561 U.S. at , 130 S. Ct. at 3050.
¶ 53 Before considering the impact of these holdings on the AUUW
statute, we must first determine the level of scrutiny to apply to our
constitutional review. A great number of recent cases have held that
intermediate scrutiny, which asks whether the challenged law serves a
substantial or important government interest (People v. Alcozer, 241
Ill. 2d 248, 262-63 (2011)), is applicable to the various sections of
both the AUUW and unlawful use of a weapon by a felon statutes. See,
e.g., People v. Spencer, 2012 IL App (1st) 102094, ¶ 26; People v.
Ross, 407 Ill. App. 3d 931 (2011); People v. Aguilar, 408 Ill. App. 3d
136, 146 (2011), pet. for leave to appeal allowed, No. 112116 (Ill.
May 25, 2011); People v. Mimes, 2011 IL App (1st) 082747, ¶ 74; People
v. Robinson, 2011 IL App (1st) 100078, ¶ 18. Nevertheless, defendant
urges us to apply strict scrutiny, which entails an examination of the
law to determine whether it is narrowly tailored to achieve a
compelling governmental interest. Aguilar, 408 Ill. App. 3d at 144.
However, he cites no state or federal cases, and we have found none,
in which courts have used this standard to evaluate the
constitutionality of laws implicating the second amendment.
Indeed, this court specifically rejected the application of
strict scrutiny to a constitutional challenge to the AUUW statute
since the statue does not severely restrict an individual's right to
bear arms. See Mimes, 2011 IL App (1st) 082747, ¶ 74. We follow Mimes
and the above-cited cases and apply intermediate scrutiny.
¶ 54 The provision of the AUUW statute at issue here bars the possession of a firearm by an individual convicted of a felony, except where the individual is on his or her land, abode, fixed place of business or on the land of another as an invitee. 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6(a)(1) (West 2010). The purpose of this statute is to protect the public from the threat posed by convicted felons possessing firearms. People v. Crawford, 145 Ill. App. 3d 318, 321 (1986); Spencer, 2012 IL App (1st) 102094, ¶ 28.
¶ 55 Defendant argues the statute does not pass scrutiny because Heller and McDonald extend the right to bear arms in self-defense outside the home. We need not determine whether the rather narrow holdings in those cases can be read to encompass a right to bear arms outside the home, as the Supreme Court has explicitly recognized that certain classes of people may be disqualified from exercising this right. Specifically, the Supreme Court noted its decision was not meant to "cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons." Heller, 554 U.S. at 626. Indeed, the Court described such provisions as "presumptively valid." Id. at 627 n.26. Defendant argues we should not follow this dicta. But our supreme court has held that judicial dicta should carry dispositive weight in inferior courts. Hawes v. Luhr Brothers, Inc., 212 Ill. 2d 93, 100 (2004); see also People v. Davis, 408 Ill. App. 3d 747, 750 (2011).
¶ 56 Accordingly, we conclude that the AUUW statute is constitutionally permissible despite its restrictions on the right of felons to bear arms, as it is a valid exercise of the important governmental interest in protecting the health, safety and general welfare of its citizens. See Ross, 407 Ill. App. 3d at 942; Robinson, 2011 IL App (1st) 100078, ¶ 26; Spencer, 2011 IL App (1st) 102094, ¶ 31. Therefore, defendant's facial challenge to the statute fails on second amendment grounds.
¶ 57 Turning to defendant's "as applied" claim, it is well established that a court is not capable of making an "as applied" determination of a statute's constitutionality where there has been neither an evidentiary hearing nor any findings of fact in the lower court. Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 300-01 (1993); see also Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, 237 Ill. 2d 217, 228 (2010). Therefore, we decline to consider defendant's "as applied" challenge to the statute due to the fact that defendant failed to litigate this issue in the trial court.
¶ 58 F. Validity of Three Year Mandatory Supervised Release Period
¶ 59 Finally, defendant argues the trial court should have imposed a two-year MSR period instead of a three-year period, because the offense for which he was convicted was a Class 2 felony. We disagree. Because this involves a question of statutory interpretation, our review is de novo. Vuletich v. United States Steel Corp., 117 Ill. 2d 417, 421 (1987).
¶ 60 The law is clear that when a defendant qualifies for Class X sentencing, a three-year period of MSR is necessarily imposed. See, e.g., People v. Watkins, 387 Ill. App. 3d 764, 766-67 (2009); People v. Smart, 311 Ill. App. 3d 415, 417-18 (2000); People v. Anderson, 272 Ill. App. 3d 537, 541 (1995). In Anderson, this court explained the reasoning behind imposing a three-year MSR period on an offender who was Class X eligible by background, but not convicted of a Class X offense, stating "the gravity of the conduct offensive to the public safety and welfare, authorizing Class X sentencing, justifiably requires lengthier watchfulness after prison release than violations of a less serious nature." 272 Ill. App. 3d at541.
¶ 61 Defendant acknowledges these holdings, but argues People v. Pullen, 192 Ill. 2d 36 (2000) compels a different result. In Pullen, our supreme court considered the consecutive sentencing provision and its application to section 5-5-3(c)(8) of the Unified Code of Corrections, making certain offenders Class X eligible by background. 192 Ill. 2d at 38; 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3(c)(8) (West 2008). The supreme court explained that section 5-5-3(c)(8) requires persons subject to its provisions to be sentenced as Class X offenders, not that their offenses are to be treated as Class X felonies for sentencing purposes. Pullen, 192 Ill. 2d at 43. Therefore, where the defendant was convicted of two Class 2 felonies, but was sentenced as a Class X offender, the maximum permissible sentence imposed should have been based on the maximum permissible sentence for two Class 2 felonies, not two Class X felonies. Id. at 43-44.
¶ 62 Significantly, several cases have examined Anderson, Smart, and Watkins in light of Pullen and nevertheless come to the conclusion that a defendant sentenced as a Class X offender due to prior convictions is required to serve the Class X MSR term of three years. See, e.g., People v. Rutledge, 409 Ill. App. 3d 22, 26 (2011); People v. McKinney, 399 Ill. App. 3d 77, 81-82 (2010); People v. Lee, 397 Ill. App. 3d 1067, 1073 (2010). These cases have reasoned, and we agree, that Pullen merely "limits the extent to which separate sentences for separate offenses may be served consecutively." McKinney, 399 Ill. App. 3d at 83. Pullen does not disturb the conclusion that because the MSR term is part of the sentence, an individual subject to Class X sentencing for whatever reason will be subject to the Class X MSR period. Lee, 397 Ill. App. 3d at 1073. We decline to depart from these decisions, and hold that imposing a three-year period of MSR would be appropriate if defendant's conviction is upheld on remand.
¶ 64 For the reasons stated, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, but vacate the sentence and remand for new posttrial proceedings.
¶ 65 Judgment affirmed; sentence vacated and remanded.
© 1992-2012 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:
User Rating Click here to vote
Find all Nintendo 3DS Download Code stores and prices to download and play Dr. Kawashima's Devilish Brain Training at the best price. Save time and money: Compare CD Key Stores. Activate Dr. Kawashima's Devilish Brain Training Download Code on the Nintendo eShop to download your Wii U game.
The Nintendo 3DS Game Code displayed are safe and our staff test them frequently.
When you add the Game Key on your Nintendo eShop Account, the game will be added to your library, then you can download your videogame for free and at any time. If you bought the box set version, you will receive your gamebox by courier within few days.
You can participate to these tests by adding comments about your Nintendo 3DS Game Code purchase in the store review page. Enjoy the best deals for Dr. Kawashima's Devilish Brain Training Game Download Code with Allkeyshop.com!
Dr. Kawashimas Devilish Brain Training is a game published and developed by Nintendo.
This is the direct result of the two previous games envisioned this time for the 3DS.
The goal is to stimulate your brain with many daily exercises.
Playing on 3DS lets you take part in training at any time in your life everyday. Examples are numerous, you can play on the bus, in the car, in your spare time, lunch break … Everywhere!
Not only is this game great for you mental health its also highly entertaining with engaging game play.
The series Dr. Kawashima is played through many puzzles, logic operations, mathematics, and other materials with intellect and entertainment the focus of the game. The emphasis is put on concentration for your brain and a gradual increase in the complexity and stimulation as you progress farther and farther.
|Price €
(10 reviews)
This is a Box Edition. (DVD-CD ROM). This is not a downloadable product. Please read the sellers page for any additional costs (taxes, delivery) and delivery time for your country.
(142 reviews)
Use the code on the Nintendo eShop of your Nintendo Console. You need your console to be connected to Internet. Once connected to the Nintendo eShop, you can enter and redeem your Download Code.
There are 2 offers ranging from 7.99€ to 49.99€.
To report a missing price, please click here (Affiliates only).

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Anraku Ansaku Oxidant - Pink Pre-Order
Sold Out
Sorry, All Gone!
Medicom continues their collaboration with famed Kaiju artist Anraku Ansaku! Standing at 260mm (around 10.25 inches), this Oxidant is cast in light pink vinyl with green and silver sprays.
Related ProductsView More Items
Casey Jones - TMNT - POP! TV
Lunch Money Coin Purse


text:
|Publication number
|Publication type
|Application number
|Publication date
|Jan 13, 2009
|Filing date
|Nov 12, 2003
|Priority date
|Nov 13, 2002
|Fee status
|Also published as
|Publication number
|Michael Haisch
|Original Assignee
|Carl Zeiss Surgical Gmbh
|Export Citation
|BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
|Patent Citations (14), Referenced by (24), Classifications (24), Legal Events (5)
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet
This application claims the benefit of priority application DE102 52 837.3 filed in Germany on Nov. 13, 2002, the subject matter of which is incorporated herein by reference.
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to an examination system and an examination method for displaying a tissue region to a user. The tissue region is in particular a portion of a patient to undergo a surgical operation, and the user is in particular a surgeon performing such surgical operation.
2. Brief Description of Related Art
In a conventional surgical system and method, e.g., a near-surface tumor is to be excised from the tissue region, and the surgical operation is performed by a surgeon viewing the tissue region through a surgical microscope. An ultrasound system may be used for localizing the tumor to be excised. The surgeon scans the tissue region in which the tumor is presumed with a measuring head of the ultrasound system, and the surgeon views sampled ultrasonic depth scans on a display device of the ultrasound system. From the depth scans the surgeon can conclude, whether there is any tumor tissue at the location at which the measuring head is presently located. The surgeon then looks through the surgical microscope to perceive such location in the microscope image and memorize the same. By multiply repeating this procedure, the surgeon perceives the extension of the tumor, memorizes the same and can then perform the surgical operation to excise the tumor while looking through the surgical microscope.
This procedure is complicated and requires high concentration on the part of the surgeon, because the success of the operation depends on the extent to which the surgeon can memorize the extension of the tumor.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a system and a method that may simplify localizing specific tissue types in an image of a microscope.
To solve this object, the invention provides an examination system for displaying a tissue region to a viewer, comprising: an optical system for generating an optical image of the tissue region; a tissue qualifying system having a measuring head for receiving tissue data, and having a computer for analyzing the obtained tissue data and discriminating the obtained tissue data into at least two data categories; a position detecting system configured to determine a position of the measuring head relative to the component of the optical system; and an indicating system for optically marking portions of the optical image of the tissue region based on the detected position of the measuring head and on the discriminated data category.
The data categories may characterize the tissue at those locations at which the measuring head samples tissue data at a particular time. According to an exemplary embodiment, the at least two data categories comprise a "tumor tissue" and a "non-tumor tissue". However, it is also possible that the tissue qualifying system discriminates a higher number or other types of tissue, such as nerves and supporting tissue.
The examination system may enable the user to perceive an extension of a specific type of tissue in the tissue region under examination, without having to avert his view from the image of the tissue region generated by the optical system. This is because the viewer may move the measuring head across the tissue region while observing the optical image thereof, and the examination system may provide the marking or indication of the image at those locations of the image where the tissue qualifying system discriminates a certain data category from the data sampled by the measuring head. Since these markings or indications may be provided directly in the image generated by the optical system, the viewer does not have to avert his view from, e.g., a display for generating the optical image of the tissue region, as this was necessary in the conventional system.
According to a preferred embodiment, it is possible that the marking or indication displayed at a certain location in the image is continued to be displayed at that location even when the measuring head has been further moved and is already sampling data at another location of the tissue region. After systematically scanning the tissue region to be examined, an extended partial region of the image of the tissue region, in which the tissue type of interest is present, is marked by e.g. highlighting, a particular color or other means.
In order to sample the tissue data, various known methods may be employed. According to preferred exemplary embodiments, the measuring head may comprise a fluorescence measuring head, a Raman spectroscopy head, an acousto-optical measuring head, an optical coherence tomography (OCT) measuring head, an ultrasound measuring head, such as an ultrasonic Doppler measuring head, a concentration measuring head, such as a blood glucose concentration measuring head, a sodium concentration measuring head and a potassium concentration measuring head, and a temperature measuring head.
According to a preferred exemplary embodiment, the optical system may comprise a microscope having an objective lens. Herein, the position detection system is preferably configured to determine the position of the measuring head relative to the objective lens.
The microscope preferably comprises a camera to record image data which represent the optical image of the tissue region. A computer can then, by image data processing, recognize the measuring head in the image and calculate its position within the image. At this calculated position, the marking is then displayed, if the tissue data fall into a designated data category.
It is, however, also preferred to additionally provide a position detection system independent of the microscope for evaluating the relative position between the measuring head and the microscope. A conventional triangulation system tracking suitable markings provided at the measuring head is an example for such position detection system. Here it is also possible to evaluate both the position of the microscope relative to the position detection system, and the position of the measuring head relative to the position detection system, and to calculate the relative position between the microscope and the measuring head from the positions of the microscope and the measuring head.
The indication system preferably comprises a display for displaying the marking and a first beam splitter for coupling an image of the displayed marking into a beam path of the microscope, whereby a simultaneous perceptibility of both the optical image generated by the microscope and the marking is made possible.
Where the microscope comprises an ocular lens, the image of the displayed marking is preferably coupled into the beam path between the objective lens and the ocular lens by a first beam splitter.
According to a preferred embodiment the optical system comprises, e.g. for archive purposes, a camera for recording an image coupled out of the beam path between the objective lens and the ocular lens by a second beam splitter. The second beam splitter is preferably provided downstream of the first beam splitter in the beam path, so that in the image recorded by the camera the generated markings are also included.
However, it is also possible that the camera first records an image of the tissue region free of the markings, and that the markings are then electronically introduced into the image recorded by the camera.
In particular, in a case where the position detection system evaluates data of the optical image of the tissue region, in which data markings are provided, it is preferable to provide the markings using color components which are different from those color components which the position detection system evaluates for determining the position of the measuring head.
Besides displaying the optical image of the examined tissue region to the viewer by means of ocular lenses, it is also preferred to display the image to the viewer by a display device which the viewer can wear on his head, such as a head mounted display. Furthermore, the optical image can be displayed on a monitor.
The measuring head can be adapted to sample data at only one location at a time. However, it is also possible that the measuring head samples data at plural locations simultaneously, which are, e.g., arranged on a line or distributed in a two-dimensional array. For the multiple locations, a discrimination according to tissue categories is respectively performed, and a corresponding marking is provided in the optical image of the tissue region.
The forgoing as well as other advantageous features of the invention will be more apparent from the following detailed description of exemplary embodiments of the invention with reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein:
In the embodiments described below, components which are identical in function and structure are designated as far as possible by the same reference numerals. Therefore, to understand the features of the individual components of a specific embodiment, the descriptions of other embodiments should be referred to.
An exemplary examination system 1 shown in
Furthermore, the examination system 1 comprises a tissue qualifying system 13, having an ultrasound measuring head 15 for sampling tissue data and a discriminating device 17 for evaluating the tissue data. The discriminating device 17 may be realized as a software component in a computer 16. The ultrasound measuring head 15 emits ultrasonic waves from a tip 19 of the measuring head and receives ultrasonic waves reflected by the tissue and generates data therefrom, such as depicted by way of example in
The discriminating device 17 evaluates the data provided by the measuring head and discriminates same into two data categories, namely "tumor tissue" and "non-tumor tissue". The discrimination can be performed, e.g. in such a manner that the computer averages data from regions labeled I and II, respectively, in
In the beam path of the stereo-microscope 3 on the left in
The detected position of the measuring head 15 is supplied by the image evaluation device 27 to a marker display device 31, which may also be realized as a software component in the computer 16. The marker display device 31 further receives a signal from the discrimination device 17, whenever same discriminates the data sampled by the measuring head 15 as "tumor tissue". The device 31 then generates image data representing an image which has a marking, such as a green spot, at the position detected by the position detecting device 27. These image data are then submitted to an LCD-display 33 displaying an image representing the image data. The image is coupled into the beam path of the microscope on the right in
Alternatively, or additionally, to the display of the individual markings as circles, it is also possible to display a line, indicated as a dashed line 47 in
In the embodiment shown in
In order that the markings 45 coupled in may not disturb evaluation of the position of the light emitting diodes 29 by the image evaluation device 27, the markings may be displayed in green, while the evaluation device 27 uses only red image components for evaluation of the position of the measuring head, namely those of the color which the light emitting diodes 29 emit.
An examination system 1 a shown schematically in
Different from the embodiment illustrated with reference to
A determination of the position of the measuring head 15 a relative to the objective lens 8 a of the microscope 3 a is performed in the examination system 1 a not by evaluating the image recorded by the camera 25 a, but by evaluating an image recorded by a further camera 55 arranged at a distance from the objective lens 8 a. The camera 55 tracks a marker pattern 57 in the form of a square arranged inside of another square provided on a surface of the measuring head 15 a, and the computer 16 a determines a position and an orientation of the line 19 a, along which the measuring head 15 a samples data, based on an evaluation of the image recorded by the camera 55. If the evaluation of the data results in a discrimination of the data as "tumor tissue" for one of the plural locations along line 19 a, the computer 16 a displays a marking at the corresponding image location in the image shown by the head-mounted display 51, as has been illustrated above with reference to
In the previously described embodiments, it is possible to detect a shift of the examined tissue region within the image field of the microscope by image processing. The markings displayed in the image may then be displaced in accordance with the determined shift, such that re-scanning the examined tissue region with the measuring head may not be necessary after such a shift.
Such shift of the examined tissue region in the image area of the microscope may occur on the one hand due to movements of the patient, and on the other hand due to the surgeon moving the microscope in the operating room relative to the patient. The shift can be detected, e.g. by the computer analyzing the image of the object area 41 (compare
Alternatively to the determination of the shift by image processing as described above, it is also possible in a simplified embodiment only to record the coordinates of the microscope in the operating room and to presume that the patient does not move. The shift to be detected then results from variations of the coordinates of the microscope in the operating room.
The markings are preferably stored in an image memory, the contents of which represent an extended image area which extends beyond the momentarily viewed image area 41 (compare
The optical system may alternatively or in addition to the microscope also include an endoscope or any video-optical system. Furthermore, if the measuring head is an ultrasonic measuring head, it may also be of a flow detecting Doppler type, or of a duplex type. However, the measuring head may also be adapted to detect biochemical or electrophysical parameters, such as a blood glucose concentration, a sodium or/and potassium concentration or a ratio of same, or a tissue or body fluid temperature.
Summarized, the invention may provide an examination system and a corresponding examination method, comprising: Arranging a tissue region in a vicinity of an object plane of a microscope and generating an optical image of the tissue region, receiving tissue data from a measuring head separate from the microscope, discriminating the tissue data into at least two data categories and displaying markings in the optical image of the tissue region in dependence of the discriminated data category and a relative position between a component of the microscope and the measuring head.
Therefore, while the present invention has been shown and described herein in what is believed to be the most practical and preferred embodiments, it is recognized that departures can be made therefrom within the scope of the invention, which is therefore not be limited to the details disclosed herein but is to be accorded the full scope of the claims so as to embrace any and all equivalent methods and apparatus.
|Cited Patent
|Filing date
|Publication date
|Dec 16, 1986
|Nov 22, 1988
|Fantone Stephen D
|Operating microscope providing an image of an obscured object
|Oct 15, 1996
|Nov 9, 1999
|Carl Zeiss-Stiftung
|Process for the operation of an operation microscope
|Jun 7, 1995
|Dec 21, 1999
|Cosman; Eric R.
|System and method for stereotactic registration of image scan data
|Sep 30, 1999
|Dec 26, 2000
|The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University
|Method for volumetric image navigation
|Jan 20, 1999
|Feb 20, 2001
|Lightlab Imaging, Llc
|Methods and apparatus for high speed longitudinal scanning in imaging systems
|Dec 28, 2001
|May 25, 2004
|Method and apparatus for fixing a location
|Jul 3, 2000
|Jul 13, 2004
|Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung (De)
|Surgical system supported by optical coherence tomography
|Dec 28, 2001
|Aug 29, 2002
|Christoph Hauger
|Method and apparatus for fixing a location
|Jul 11, 1986
|Apr 10, 1997
|Zeiss Carl Jena Gmbh
|Jun 5, 2000
|Dec 6, 2001
|Sonem Gmbh
|Adaptive classifying device for classifying reflective/absorbent structures or acoustic barrier layers with similar properties has n channels of a spectrum to separate response signals ready to be evaluated by a classifying unit.
|Jan 3, 2001
|Aug 1, 2002
|Zeiss Carl
|Verfahren und Vorrichtung zum Festlegen eines Ortes
|Oct 4, 1996
|Apr 17, 1997
|Zeiss Carl Fa
|Design for medical neuro-surgical microscope with integrated navigation system
|Jul 2, 1999
|Jan 4, 2001
|Zeiss Carl Fa
|An optical coherence computer tomography (OCT) system for surgical support combines pre-operation tissue position data and CT data for use in navigation assistance for the operating surgeon
|Jun 26, 1998
|Jan 7, 1999
|The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University
|Method and apparatus for volumetric image navigation
|Citing Patent
|Filing date
|Publication date
|Jan 20, 2006
|Feb 8, 2011
|Massachusetts Institute Of Technology
|Methods and apparatus for optical coherence tomography scanning
|Feb 5, 2010
|Sep 11, 2012
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Gradient search integrated with local imaging in laser surgical systems
|Jun 14, 2010
|Mar 19, 2013
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Image-guided docking for ophthalmic surgical systems
|Aug 26, 2011
|Mar 19, 2013
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Imaging-based guidance system for ophthalmic docking using a location-orientation analysis
|Dec 28, 2010
|Mar 26, 2013
|Massachusetts Institute Of Technology
|Methods and apparatus for optical coherence tomography scanning
|Feb 18, 2010
|Apr 9, 2013
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Optical coherence tomographic system for ophthalmic surgery
|May 2, 2011
|Jun 11, 2013
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Image-processor-controlled misalignment-reduction for ophthalmic systems
|Sep 5, 2008
|Jul 1, 2014
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Precise targeting of surgical photodisruption
|Jun 7, 2012
|Jan 20, 2015
|Alcon Research, Ltd.
|Orthogonal light beam splitting for microscopes
|Dec 19, 2011
|May 5, 2015
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Image processor for intra-surgical optical coherence tomographic imaging of laser cataract procedures
|Dec 23, 2013
|Jun 2, 2015
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Precise targeting of surgical photodisruption
|Dec 19, 2011
|Jun 30, 2015
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Intra-surgical optical coherence tomographic imaging of cataract procedures
|May 11, 2012
|Jan 19, 2016
|Panasonic Intellectual Property Management Co., Ltd.
|Method and apparatus for manufacturing a light-emitting device including correction of an application amount of a fluorescent resin based on a fluorescent particle concentration
|Apr 30, 2015
|Aug 9, 2016
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Precise targeting of surgical photodisruption
|May 19, 2015
|Oct 4, 2016
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Intra-surgical optical coherence tomographic imaging of cataract procedures
|Apr 6, 2015
|Oct 4, 2016
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Image processor for intra-surgical optical coherence tomographic imaging of laser cataract procedures
|Nov 16, 2009
|Nov 15, 2016
|Alcon Lensx, Inc.
|Imaging surgical target tissue by nonlinear scanning
|Jan 20, 2006
|Aug 24, 2006
|Vivek Srinivasan
|Methods and apparatus for optical coherence tomography scanning
|Sep 5, 2008
|May 21, 2009
|Lensx Lasers, Inc.
|Precise Targeting of Surgical Photodisruption
|Dec 28, 2010
|Jun 9, 2011
|Massachusetts Institute Of Technology
|Methods and apparatus for optical coherence tomography scanning
|Feb 5, 2010
|Aug 11, 2011
|Ferenc Raksi
|Gradient Search Integrated with Local Imaging in Laser Surgical Systems
|Feb 18, 2010
|Aug 18, 2011
|Ilya Goldshleger
|Optical Coherence Tomographic System for Ophthalmic Surgery
|May 11, 2012
|Jun 27, 2013
|Panasonic Corporation
|Method of manufacturing light-emitting device and apparatus for manufacturing light-emitting device
|May 22, 2013
|Dec 12, 2013
|Alcon Research, Ltd.
|Orthogonal light beam splitting for microscopes
|U.S. Classification
|382/128, 128/922, 702/150
|International Classification
|Cooperative Classification
|European Classification
|Apr 23, 2004
Owner name: CARL-ZEISS-STIFTUNG TRADING AS CARL ZEISS, GERMANY
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:HAISCH, MICHAEL;REEL/FRAME:015255/0823
Effective date: 20040301
|Jan 6, 2009
Owner name: CARL ZEISS AG, GERMANY
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:CARL ZEISS STIFTUNG;REEL/FRAME:022064/0164
Effective date: 20081128
|Jan 8, 2009
Owner name: CARL ZEISS SURGICAL GMBH, GERMANY
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:CARL ZEISS AG;REEL/FRAME:022075/0806
Effective date: 20081201
|Jul 6, 2012
|Fee payment
Year of fee payment: 4
|Jul 5, 2016
|Fee payment
Year of fee payment: 8


text:
Job Type:
Primary Location:
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
All Available Locations:
External Posting Description 13;
As a Senior Accountant you will:
:Carry out tasks required to complete compilation and review engagements
:Prepare financial statements
:Complete bank and other account reconciliations
:Prepare corporate and/or personal income tax returns and other tax compliance slips
:Identify technical issues and communicate with engagement leaders
:Carry out bookkeeping activities, as required
:Work with Simply Accounting, Quickbooks, Caseware, and provide support to clients
:Respond to client queries
:Complete other related duties, as required 13;
External Posting Qualifications 13;
:Minimum 5 years of public accounting experience or equivalent work experience required
:An accounting diploma/degree an accounting designation or equivalent
:Possess good understanding of accounting principles and possess basic accounting skills and knowledge of tax compliance
:Working knowledge of Simply Accounting, Quickbooks, Caseware, and Excel
:Quick learning capacity
:Excellent ytical and problem:solving skills, strong attention to detail and ability to meet deadlines
:Strong interpersonal skills, professional manner and ability to work in a team environment
:Strong planning and organizational skills
:Ability to speak and / or Spanish is an asset 13;
Join Deloitte and bring back that loving feeling. And love the company you keep.
At Deloitte we are redefining what it means to be a professional services firm. We know that business as usual just won't cut it. Our culture is built on the collaboration, flexibility and innovation needed to perform at the highest levels and exceed expectations.
We offer a truly differentiated Talent Experience that empowers our people withunlimited opportunities to do meaningful work and to grow, learn, and lead at every point in their career. With the power of our global network and reach, you'll always be part of the Deloitte community. Once Deloitte always Deloitte.
Lead yourself. Lead a team. Lead the firm. It's all possible at Deloitte.
Deloitte is an inclusive employer dedicated to building a diverse workforce. We encourage applications from all qualified candidates and will accommodate applicants' needs under the respective provincial human rights codes throughout all stages of the recruitment and selection process. Please advise the Recruiter to ensure your accessibility needs are accommodated throughout this process. Information received relating to accommodation will be addressed confidentially.
We thank all applicants in advance for their interest; however, only those candidates selected for an interview will be contacted.
Source: http://www.tiptopjob.com/jobs/58869617_job.asp?source=
Location: Winnipeg


text:
Domain Name: VACCINEH5N1.INFO
Domain ID: D9726598-LRMS
WHOIS Server:
Referral URL: www.networksolutions.com
Updated Date: 2016-01-02T09:18:13Z
Creation Date: 2005-03-01T23:57:21Z
Registry Expiry Date: 2017-03-01T23:57:21Z
Sponsoring Registrar: Network Solutions, LLC
Sponsoring Registrar IANA ID: 2
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Registrant ID: C4134800-LRMS
Registrant Name: Hamilton-Felton Family, LLC
Registrant Organization: HAMILTON-FELTON FAMILY, LLC
Registrant Street: 1927 PENDLETON ST
Registrant City: Columbia
Registrant State/Province: SC
Registrant Postal Code: 29201-3905
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.8037991126
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax:
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email:
Admin ID: C4134800-LRMS
Admin Name: Hamilton-Felton Family, LLC
Admin Organization: HAMILTON-FELTON FAMILY, LLC
Admin Street: 1927 PENDLETON ST
Admin City: Columbia
Admin State/Province: SC
Admin Postal Code: 29201-3905
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.8037991126
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax:
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email:
Tech ID: C4134800-LRMS
Tech Name: Hamilton-Felton Family, LLC
Tech Organization: HAMILTON-FELTON FAMILY, LLC
Tech Street: 1927 PENDLETON ST
Tech City: Columbia
Tech State/Province: SC
Tech Postal Code: 29201-3905
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.8037991126
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax:
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email:
Billing ID: 43887984-NSI
Billing Name: Hamilton-Felton Family, LLC
Billing Organization:
Billing Street: 1927 Pendleton Street
Billing City: Columbia
Billing State/Province: SC
Billing Postal Code: 29201
Billing Country: US
Billing Phone: +1.8037991126
Billing Phone Ext:
Billing Fax:
Billing Fax Ext:
Billing Email:
Name Server: NS95.WORLDNIC.COM
Name Server: NS96.WORLDNIC.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned
>>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2016-12-01T01:16:25Z <<<
For more information on Whois status codes, please visit https://icann.org/epp
Access to AFILIAS WHOIS information is provided to assist persons in determining the contents of a domain name registration record in the Afilias registry database. The data in this record is provided by Afilias Limited for informational purposes only, and Afilias does not guarantee its accuracy. This service is intended only for query-based access. You agree that you will use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances will you use this data to(a) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission by e-mail, telephone, or facsimile of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations to entities other than the data recipient's own existing customers; or (b) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that send queries or data to the systems of Registry Operator, a Registrar, or Afilias except as reasonably necessary to register domain names or modify existing registrations. All rights reserved. Afilias reserves the right to modify these terms at any time. By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy.


text:
These are the biggest names when it comes to terrorism in the world right now. And though it is hard to measure power, there can be no doubt that these organizations are striking fear in the hearts of many across the world.
Al-Qaeda is probably the first organization that comes to mind when you think of a terrorist group. Al-Qaeda was first formed in 1989 by Osama Bin Laden and despite the fact that their founder and leader was killed, they still thrive to this day. Their main mission is to bring Jihad on all of the sinners who do not follow the word of Allah. Their biggest act of course was the attack on the World Trade Center in New York City on 9/11.


text:
Choosing the appropriate business entity for your new
venture is an important early decision.
Usually, founders will want to avoid personal liability for the
obligations of the company and often the individual owners of the business will
want to deduct business losses on their personal tax returns and avoid
taxation. Most business founders are awash in forms to fill out and file and it
is often an added desire that an entity be chosen that does not carry a
tremendous reporting and filing burden.
Below we'll take a quick look at a few of the most common business
entities used and the strengths and weaknesses of each.
Sole Proprietorship:
There is a lot to be said for the simplicity of a sole
proprietorship. It requires no formation
formalities and few, if any, reporting requirements. The proprietor will be taxed on the business'
profits and may deduct losses on their personal tax returns. That's the good news. The bad news – the sole proprietor is
personally liable for the obligations of the business. Thus, if the business racks up more debt than
it can pay, the creditors can look to the personal assets of the sole
proprietor to satisfy those debts. Just
in case it's not obvious, a sole proprietorship only works if there is one
owner of the business.
General Partnership:
A general partnership is an association of two or more persons to carry
on as co-owners of a business for profit.
Each partner is an agent of the partnership and can bind the partnership
to obligations in the ordinary course of business and each is personally liable
for the obligations of the partnership. For
taxation purposes, a partnership is a flow-through entity, meaning that the
partnership is generally not subject to state or federal taxation, but the
appropriate proportion of the partnerships profits (or losses) will be declared
on each individual partner's tax return and they will be taxed at the
individual level.
Unlike a sole proprietorship or a general partnership, a corporation is
a limited liability entity, meaning in most circumstances none of the owners
(the shareholders) are personally liable for the obligations of the
corporation. The corporation may go
belly-up and all of its creditors may seek payment from the corporation's
assets, but they can't look to the personal assets of the shareholders to
satisfy their debts. So, worst case
scenario, the shareholder can lose his original investment and his stock
certificate may be worthless. The income
of a corporation is taxable by the federal government and the state and
distributions made by the corporation to its shareholders are then taxed at the
individual level. Thus, the corporation
and its shareholders are subject to "double taxation." By qualifying and electing to operate as an
S-Corporation, double taxation may be avoided.
Maintaining a corporation requires adherence to various corporate
formalities, periodic filings and preparation of a corporate tax return, among
other ongoing requirements.
Limited Liability Company: A Limited Liability Company ("LLC") is an
entity that provides a personal liability shield for its members, like a
corporation, while, at the same time, allowing taxation at the individual
level, in the same manner as partnership taxation. LLC formation and operation has more filing
and maintenance obligations than a partnership but not quite as much as a
Many factors must be considered in choosing the appropriate business
entity. Among the questions that should
be answered are: How many people are
involved in the venture? Do each of them
intend to be active participants in the operation of the business? Is this a
particularly risky venture that may result in the business incurring
significant debts from which the individuals will want to be shielded? Will there be outside investors, either at
the initial stage of operation or further down the line? There are many more issues to take into
consideration and a qualified attorney and CPA should be engaged in this
decision-making process.


text:
Living in the tropics I could happily spend every day lounging at the beach or poolside. Alas, that can't always be the case. But the May cover of Elle Spain not only captures the feeling perfectly, but also has me halfway to the shore!
You can definitely feel the heat radiating off of this cover and if you weren't in a summer mindset Elle Spain will get you there! From the color of the water, to the bronzed body to the yellow title, this is the idyllic beach image. (You know, if the sun didn't have harmful effects…)
What's more, it features Helena Christensen photographed by Xavi Gordo. First off, I love when a real model graces the cover of a fashion magazine. And Christensen has definitely earned that title, beginning her modeling career in 1986 after winning the Ms. Denmark beauty pageant. Yes, you read that correctly—1986! Which means her career has spanned almost 30 years and she is still scoring magazine covers at the age of 44. Bikini clad magazine covers at that!
My plan for the day? Well, after having seen this Elle Spain cover, I am heading to the gym and then the beach….
Are you ready for beach weather? What do you think of Helena Christensen gracing the cover of Elle Spain?


text:
Raigad is one the famous city in Maharashtra .There are many types of Hotels in Raigad which are available for online booking. You can choose Cheap Hotels In Raigad and book best hotels at a reasonable rates with Indiahotelsroom.com . You can view all these amazing places at Raigad by staying there in some good hotels comfortably Raigad , You can book Cheap Hotels In Raigad well in advance and live comfortably during your holidays in season time at discounted Price.
Cheap Hotels In Raigad Given Prime Chance To Various People With Great Amenities: it is really great that there are great variation of facilities are being provided to the people and has superbly giving most lucrative and superior facilities to the people to enjoy the most dynamic and stylish rooms along with the grand interiors and has given supreme chances to the people to enjoy the most better arrangement of hotels in this region. Cheap Hotels In Raigad are now offering to people along with the superb accommodation that have never experience by anyone before, it has been generally observed that this kinds of hotels are generally being provided to the high class people having great fascination and the kinds of service that are provided to them are really awesome. In most of the cases hotels are great media that will help people in business and also in jobs because rather than tourism these hotels are also used for office purposes for conference and to make any big business deal and Raigad is the well known commercial town offering various kinds of employment facilities to the people to enjoy the most brilliant and extraordinary features of IT's and software and will give promising future to people. Lots of implementation along with the various kinds of amenities are provided to the tourist along with big fire place, well decorative bed rooms along with beautiful furniture, spacious balcony offering the view of Raigad city and the most important is the great foods that are being provided to the people by the delicious and superb restaurants facilities.
Cheap Hotels In Raigad are superbly given unexpected facilities: most of the high profile people will go for holiday mainly for relaxation and they mainly choose good hotels to get the best arrangement and comfort that will totally removes all the tiredness and frustrations from their life and they can lead a beautiful and most elegant holiday facilities and their hotel facts a lot. In that case most of the people having great funds will choose Cheap Hotels In Raigad are eventually giving better satisfaction to the people to get the most dynamic and beautiful experience of life and has superbly transferred to the people along with the great comfortable and great features of luxurious rooms facilities. This region has ultimately giving better satisfaction to the people along with the superb location and scenic beauty and has attracted large number of people from different regions.


text:
Thank you for your patience as you are redirected to the Request Information form.
Business and Global Innovation Major
I'm so glad Orientation helped me meet new people!
see all Ambassador profiles »
Visual Arts Alum
I am excited for further opportunities to expand and improve as a web designer and developer.
see all Alumni profiles »
see all Counselor profiles »


text:
Current Residence: UR PANTS! ;*
deviantWEAR sizing preference: Medium?
Favourite genre of music: J-Rock, J-Pop, pop, House, Rock, Dance, Trance, Hardstyle, Hardtrance, Goa/Psy-Trance
Favourite style of art: Speed/digital painting, Anime, Manga, Character designing, catgirls, ecchi, hentai, chibi.
Operating System: OSX <3
MP3 player of choice: GrooveShark <3
Shell of choice: Turtle? No, tortoise!
Wallpaper of choice: Anything animerelated
Skin of choice: What a racist question
Favourite cartoon character: Nami from OnePiece <3
Personal Quote: Everything is glompable & Some people take pills to get high, I take pills to get normal.


text:
Advanced Search | Shop by Brand
You have selected Faithfull Security & Locks. Browse through the range of products, or refine your selection further using the links below.
Showing 1 to 27 of 27 results
Faithfull Heavy Duty Padlock 70mm with Security Alarm
Faithfull 20mm 4 Digit Brass Combination Padlock
Faithfull Portable Water Leak Alarm 80db
Faithfull 40mm Laminated Steel Padlock with 62mm Long Shackle
Faithfull 38mm 4 Digit Brass Combination Padlock
Faithfull Contract Padlock Brass 32mm
Faithfull Hasp And Staple 115mm
Faithfull 40mm Brass Padlock with Long Shackle
Faithfull 1m Heavy Duty Chain & Padlock
Faithfull 20mm Brass Padlock
Faithfull 50mm PVC Coated Brass Padlock
Faithfull 50mm Laminated Steel Padlock
Faithfull 70mm Stainless Steel Discus Padlock
Faithfull 50mm Brass Padlock
Faithfull 40mm Brass Padlock
Faithfull 30mm Brass Padlock
Faithfull 40mm Laminated Steel Padlock
Faithfull 30mm Laminated Steel Padlock
Faithfull Zinc Plated Hasp & Staple 150mm with 12mm Staple Hole
Faithfull 28mm 4 Digit Brass Combination Padlock
Faithfull 80mm Brass Shutter Padlock
Faithfull 25mm Brass Padlock
Faithfull 40mm Brass Padlock Pack of 2 Keyed Alike
Faithfull Hasp And Staple 75mm
Faithfull Security Chain 10mm x 900mm Galvanised
Faithfull Security Chain 10mm x 1200mm Galvanised
Faithfull 60mm Brass Shutter Padlock
Tooled-Up.com78 Suez RoadBrimsdownEnfieldMiddlesexEN3 7PSTel : 0208 805 3535


text:
Iron Fist Bone Deep Pencil Skirt
Order today and you'll receive your goodies between and (or if you cant wait, pick special delivery & receive next working day).
Product Details
Got A Question? Email Us
This season we're in LOVE with pencil skirts! So why not make a splash with our new Iron Fist glam and gorgeous Bone Deep Pencil Skirt. This sleek black pencil skirt transforms you into a dreamy dark mermaid with an iridescent skeletal print all up the front. 'Cos who doesn't want to be a mermaid? Team with a wildfox tee.
- Pencil Skirt
- Iridescent Design
- 95% Polyester
- 5% Elastane Ponte
- Skirt Length: 24"
- Waist: 12 1/2"
- Hip: 14 1/4"
- Brand : Iron Fist


text:
Is this a pub?
Is this restaurant good for special occasions?
Is this restaurant good for dining on a budget?
Is this restaurant good for large groups?
Is this restaurant good for lunch?
Is this restaurant good for dinner?
Is this restaurant family-friendly?
Is this restaurant good for brunch?
Is this restaurant good for breakfast?
Does this restaurant offer takeout or food to go?
Thanks for helping!
3 Days in Toronto
Guide to Toronto Outdoors
Guide to Toronto for Families
Last week, me and my friend went to the Browstone and we had a great time as well as the food was devious.
Great food!! Extremely friendly and wonderful service. If you are Celiac and needing gluten free....this is the place to feast. Lots of choices!! I had a hard time deciding on what to eat cause I wanted to try them all! Lol loved the atmosphere too. Can't wait to go back!
Went there with another couple as part of a Theatre/Hotel/Dinner package. Several restaurants to choose from and we picked the Brownstone. Glad we did! The service was excellent and the food was great. As part of the package deal there was a special menu to order from that offered a selection of steak, chicken, salmon, pasta or vegetarian. So, something...
We had dinner here on Saturday evening prior to going to a play at the Panasonic Theatre down the street.
We only had a little more than 45 min prior to having to leave for the theatre, and the staff were incredibly accommodating. Our server indicated which items could be made quickly and made recommendations on most popular menu items....
Had appetizers and drinks here before a play. The food was delicious. The appetizer sampler platter was more than enough for two. The ambiance was great. We had a window seat at the front to ourselves. The waiter, John, was attentive with a great sense of humour. I had 2 oz cucumber martini with Hendricks Gin and my husband had...
I had made a reservation for dinner earlier in the week, only to have the restaurant call me the morning of and cancel, saying a larger party had added more people to their group and now the restaurant was full.
I was shocked. I have never experienced such poor customer service before.
My family and I had chosen this restaurant...
This an old fashioned restaurant with white tablecloths, room to sit, quiet enough for pleasant conversation and excellent food and service. Not fancy but really well cooked and presented bistro food. Consistently good. Highly recommend.
Blown away by the welcoming staff, beautiful decor, and exquisite food. Experienced as a theater package for Matilda, and couldn't have imagined a better place to start our evening!
We enjoyed our drinks outside on the patio and did some people watching. Great neighborhood off Yonge and Church area. Service was very good, attentive and professional. We'll come back. Food menu looked very nice, as did the dining area inside.
We happened upon this restaurant/bistro while walking down Jonge Street. In their window, they advertised jazz for that evening and a specially priced three course menu. So, after checking out the menu, we made a reservation.
The dining room is off of the bar and has warmth and appeal. Older brick building that had an authentic feel and good vibe....
Own or manage this property? Claim your listing for free to respond to reviews, update your profile and much more.
Winterlicious menu
See all questions


text:
Your basket is empty.
Contact Details
Address 2198 Filbert (x. Fillmore) San Francisco, CA 94123
Email firstname.lastname@example.com
Phone (415) 896.4671
Opening hours
Mon to Fri – 8am to 7pm
Saturday and Sunday – 8am to 6pm
Courier Delivery
Customers in San Francisco now have the option for same-day delivery* for those must have today purchases – delivering your Rapha goods to you with the best couriers in the Bay Area.
Phone the Clubhouse (415.896.4671) or stop in before 1pm and your goods can be delivered by TCB Couriers to your home by 6pm or office by 5pm.
• $20 per delivery.
• Orders of $300 and more will be delivered free of charge.
• Delivery area within the 7×7 of SF only.
Couriers are handed a cup of Four Barrel coffee on pickup to ensure speedy delivery.
*order must be placed directly with the store and applies only to inventory at the store.
In this section
Rapha San Francisco
Rapha San Francisco is a short spin from the Golden Gate Bridge, which transports riders from one of the country's most lively cities to the Marin Headlands, with its treasure trove of long climbs, stunning views, and sweeping descents. If a rider ever tires of exploring Marin – which, although unlikely, happens to some – then riders can turn their attention to the protected forests of the Southern Bay, or the hills that lie behind Berkley and Oakland. Rapha San Francisco is the perfect base from which to begin any of these adventures, with its fine coffee, selection of pastries and ride food, and full selection of Rapha clothing and accessories.
The Rapha Clubhouse in San Francisco is located in the Marina District, just a 10-minute ride from the Golden Gate Bridge, the gateway to Marin County and some of the…
Club Ride
- Saturdays
Check the RSVP link to view our upcoming Saturday ride schedule. Our Saturday club rides take us over the Golden Gate Bridge and into Marin… read on »
The Clubhouse will screen all major road racing throughout the pro tour calendar. In addition to live race screenings we host a variety of other events.
Holiday Party San Francisco
- December 18th, 2 'til close
Join us on Sunday, December 18th from 2PM until close for a holiday party. We'll have seasonal drinks, food, free in-house gift wrapping and… read on »
As you should expect in San Francisco, the coffee and food at the Clubhouse have terrific character. Featuring Four Barrel Coffee, Red Blossom Tea, quiche from Vive La Tarte, and…


text: God Reverses the Effects of a Car Accident By GNLiMarch 20, 2013 Like Us Share Share on Twitter Subscribe A car accident left Randy Lawrence with sciatic nerve damage that made it nearly impossible to rotate his neck without severe pain, until God did a miracle. Sponsored Watch Your Favorite Christian Films, 24/7. Click Here To Start Your Free Trial Today


text:
Events Calendar
Training Class: The Revolution in Toxicology 101
Date: 2015-02-24
Location: Johns Hopkins Mt. Washington Center, Baltimore, MD
- Type: Event
- Directions
- Event Website
Toxicology is undergoing revolutionary change in the early 21st century. It's not easy, however, to achieve an overview of these changes. Consider, for instance: What's the difference between TT21c, Tox21, Tox-21c, and EDSP21? What is the difference between an AOP and a PoT? What distinguishes ToxCast from the Human Toxome or the Human Toxicology Project Consortium? What is ITS compared to IATA? When is a review systematic and a conclusion evidence-based? CAAT is offering a unique opportunity to learn in a classroom setting from people closely involved in implementing these changes. Visit their website for more details and registration information.
Baltimore, MD