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.
March 28, 1990
THOMAS E. HARRIS, APPELLANT,v.UNITED STATES, APPELLEE
Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia; Hon. Donald S. Smith, Trial Judge
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied,
Before Rogers, Chief Judge, and Belson, Associate Judge and Mack, *fn1 Senior Judge.
ROGERS, Chief Judge: Appellant Thomas E. Harris appeals from his conviction by a jury of distribution of phencyclidine (PCP) and marijuana and of possession with the intent to distribute PCP and marijuana. D.C. Code 33-541 (a)(1) (1981). He contends that he was denied a fair trial when the prosecutor improperly raised a missing witness inference on cross-examination and then used it in rebuttal closing argument to shift the burden of proof, and impermissibly bolstered in rebuttal argument the testimony of the police officers. Viewing the cumulative prejudice created by these errors in the absence of any curative action by the trial Judge, we reverse.
The charges against appellant involved an undercover sale of a $15 tinfoil packet of marijuana laced with PCP. Officer Byron Wallace testified that on August 21, 1984, around 1:30 p.m. while on undercover patrol in the 1800 block of 6th Street, an area known for high PCP sales, he purchased from appellant a tinfoil packet of a greenish weed that smelled of PCP which appellant took from a brown paper bag. Based on Wallace's description, Officers Mitchell and Washington arrested appellant. Mitchell found a brown paper bag with three other tinfoil packets of marijuana laced with PCP on the sidewalk in the area from which appellant had walked. Officer Wallace testified that, surprisingly, appellant was the only person on the street at the time of the drug sale, and that the serial number of the prerecorded $20 bill he used to make the buy matched the serial number of the bill recovered in the back seat of the police cruiser which transported appellant to the police station.
Appellant's defense was misidentification. He testified that, after visiting a friend at the Florida Grill on 11th Street, he began shooting dice with a friend named Raymond Jones and another person, whom he did not know, in an alley near 6th Street. According to appellant, there were other people on the street at the time, at least one of whom was selling drugs. After losing at the crap game, appellant walked to a store and when he returned, everyone including the man who was calling out that he had "love boat" for sale had gone, and Officer Wallace grabbed appellant, saying that he had a warrant for appellant's arrest. Wallace searched appellant, took six dollars and other personal effects from his pocket, handcuffed his hands behind his back and put him in the back seat of a police cruiser. On the way to the police station, the cruiser stopped at 13th and H Streets, and the police put another man in the back seat. According to appellant, when the police found a balled up $20 bill behind the seat of the cruiser and asked both men whose it was, neither man claimed it. Appellant denied knowing anything about the brown paper bag containing drugs, and pointed out that he had not run when Wallace approached him and that because he had been taken to the police cruiser upon being arrested, he did not know whether the police had recovered a bag near him. *fn2
On cross-examination. the prosecutor asked appellant. if he had tried to get his friend whom he was visiting to testify in court. Appellant said that he had tried, but neither that friend nor any of the men with whom he was gambling wanted "to get caught up in no cases whereas they might can get another charge for testifying or they don't want to be able to like--like no police to see them where they could can have to be like harassing them. Because police harass people." The prosecutor, claiming he did not understand, asked appellant if his friends would not testify because they had prior criminal records. Appellant responded that his friends would not testify and that he "just got caught up in something" and he had "to deal with it" because they would not testify for him. The prosecutor asked again if it was because his friends had criminal records. Appellant said he had no knowledge of that. The prosecutor then questioned appellant about the other men playing craps and returned to the question of whether he knew their addresses. Appellant said that he knew one man named Raymond Jones but did not know Jones' address. After asking several questions about appellant's acquaintance with the other man in the crap game, the prosecutor asked whether appellant had tried to get Jones to come to court to testify for him. Appellant again replied that they would not come to court for him. *fn3 On redirect, appellant testified that he had given his counsel the street names of potential witnesses but had been unable to obtain their addresses.
In his initial closing argument to the jury, the prosecutor reviewed the government's evidence and tried to explain the discrepancies between the officers' testimony about the time of the drug buy and the call for transport, stating twice that "the important evidence in this case is the testimony that you heard from the officers," and concluding that on that basis "there's no doubt whatsoever that is guilty of the four counts charged." The defense closing argument focused on the government's burden of proof, noting that there was no evidence of the $5 that would have been returned in the $15 drug buy and no documentary proof of the serial number of the prerecorded $20 bill. Defense counsel asked the jury to use its common sense in considering the likelihood of a drug seller trying to sell drugs in an area where no one else was around, the discrepancy between the officer's testimony about the time of the sale and the call for transport, and the improbability of appellant being able to reach into his pocket and remove a $20 bill with a paralyzed handcuffed arm while the police watched his movements from the front seat.
In rebuttal closing argument, the prosecutor told the jury that "what this case really boils down to is whether you believe the testimony of the police officers or not. It's whether you take their word against the word of ." After reviewing the police officers' testimony, the prosecutor told the jury that "to believe that is telling the truth and to find him not guilty you have to believe that the three police officers . . . who testified, are lying to you." He asked the jury to consider the improbability that the policemen, "all of whom have been on the force for many years, would risk their careers, their future, their retirement with the police department and lie, commit perjury on the stand to you about this case . . . ." For two typed pages of transcript the prosecutor pointed out why the police were telling the truth, noting that each corroborated the others' testimony. Then the prosecutor asked, "Was there any kind of corroboration for 's testimony. Is there anything to corroborate or support what he told you. There's not." In a final foray, the prosecutor told the jury again that the case "boils down to whether you believe what the police officers testified to or whether you don't."
Defense counsel raised no objections to the cross-examination or rebuttal arguments.
Appellant contends that he was denied a fair trial as a result of the prosecutor's comments which had the effect of improperly raising a missing witness argument, unfairly bolstering the weight to be given to police testimony, and shifting the burden of proof to appellant.
The prosecutor's cross-examination of appellant about the absence of Raymond Jones at trial constituted at least an "incomplete" missing argument by noting the absence of a witness even if the prosecutor's questions did not suggest a negative inference from their absence. Because of the particular hazards of using the missing witness argument, which "essentially creates evidence from non-evidence," Thomas v. United States, 447 A.2d 52, 58 (D.C. 1982), and poses the danger of appearing to shift the burden of proof, Price v. United States, 531 A.2d 984, 994 (D.C. 1987), this court has delineated a clear rule requiring a party who wishes to make such an argument to obtain the prior permission of the trial Judge.
Before a party may argue an adverse inference as to an absent witness, counsel must seek permission from the court, and the court must determine (1) that the witness in question is peculiarly available to the party against whom the inference is sought, and (2) that the witness' testimony would have elucidated the transaction at issue.
Lawson v. United States, 514 A.2d 787, 789 (D.C. 1986) (emphasis added) (citations omitted). The court has long warned the prosecutor and the trial court of the limited circumstances under which missing witness arguments are to be permitted, see, e.g., Conyers v. United States, 309 A.2d 309, 312-13 (D.C. 1973). See also Gass v. United States, 135 U.S. App. D.C. 11, 19-20, 416 F.2d 767, 775-76 (1969) (in future counsel should obtain advance court ruling before arguing to jury inference from absence of a witness); Young v. United States, 150 U.S. App. D.C. 98, 105, 463 F.2d 934, 941 (1972) (Gass established a "rule of practice"). Although the requirement that a party seek prior permission originally applied only to "complete" missing witness arguments, Logan v. United States, 489 A.2d 485, 490 (D.C. 1985), it is now, and was when appellant was tried, equally applicable to "incomplete" missing witness arguments. *fn4 Thus, a lawyer who proposes to make a missing witness argument, "even if it goes no further than to note the absence of the witness, should first obtain permission from the court to do so in order to avoid injecting prejudicial error into the trial." Arnold, supra note 4, 511 A.2d at 416 (citing Young, supra, 150 U.S. App. D.C. at 107 n.16; Conyers, supra, 309 A.2d at 313), quoted in Lawson, supra, 514 A.2d at 790. These cases leave no ambiguity about the requirement that parties must obtain prior permission from the trial Judge in all instances. It was, therefore, error, as the government conceded at oral argument, for the prosecutor to raise a missing witness inference without first obtaining the trial Judge's permission.
The error was compounded since the missing witness inference never should have been allowed in the case. See Lawson, supra, 514 A.2d at 793. This court has long placed an obligation on the trial Judge to disallow missing witness argument unless both preconditions are met--the witness is peculiarly available to one party and able to elucidate the transaction--and even then, the trial Judge must exercise discretion in determining whether to allow such argument. Id. at 789; Thomas, supra, 447 A.2d at 58; Simmons v. United States, 444 A.2d 962, 963-64 (D.C. 1982); Dyson v. United States, 418 A.2d 127, 131 (D.C. 1980); Cooper v. United States, 415 A.2d 528, 534 (D.C. 1980). In the instant case, the trial Judge should not have permitted the argument since neither pre-condition would have been met. The witnesses were not "peculiarly within" appellant's power to produce since appellant testified that he had asked Raymond Jones and his friend to come into court, and they had refused. Thomas, supra, 447 A.2d at 57-58. Nor would their testimony have "elucidated the transaction" since they were neither eyewitnesses to the drug transaction nor alibi witnesses, but would only have testified that they were with appellant before the alleged drug sale took place. Young, supra, 150 U.S. App. D.C. at 104; Dyson, supra, 418 A.2d at 131; Haynes v. United States, 318 A.2d 901, 903 (D.C. 1974).
In rebuttal closing argument the prosecutor's comments on appellant's failure to offer corroboration for his testimony completed the missing witness argument. By focusing on the lack of corroboration for appellant's defense, the prosecutor called attention to the differences between the testimony of the police officers and appellant and reminded the jury of witnesses whom appellant had not called to testify. By juxtaposing these arguments, the prosecutor implied to the jury that the missing witnesses' testimony would have been adverse to appellant. See Conyers, supra, 309 A.2d at 313. The effect of the rebuttal argument was to unfairly shift the burden of proof and jeopardize the fairness of appellant's trial because the comments went to the very essence of his defense at a point when he could not respond. Garris v. United States, 295 A.2d 510, 512 (D.C. 1972) (quoting Gaither v. United States, 134 U.S. App. D.C. 154, 172, 413 F.2d 1061, 1079 (1969)). *fn5
The prejudice to the fairness of the trial was exacerbated when the prosecutor, also in rebuttal argument, impermissibly bolstered the credibility of the police officers thereby suggesting that the jury should believe them, not appellant. While these comments about the police standing alone would not be determinative, United States v. Stevenson, 138 U.S. App. D.C. 10, 12, 424 F.2d 923, 925 (1970), viewed in the context of the entire closing argument, they lend weight to appellant's other claims of prejudicial error. See Young, supra, 150 U.S. App. D.C. at 104; [ Howard] Jones v. United States, 512 A.2d 253, 258 (D.C. 1986). The prosecutor's statements that the police officers had too much interest in protecting their jobs and retirement plans to risk lying were not grounded in evidence and therefore, were improper. Toliver v. United States, 468 A.2d 958, 961 (D.C. 1983). In addition, the prosecutor not only stated an erroneous syllogism--that to believe appellant the jury had to disbelieve the police officer--but he contrasted "career" officers with appellant who had nothing to lose by testifying. Even viewed, as the government maintains, as argument made in response to defense attacks on the police officers' credibility beyond challenges to the officers' ability to observe and recall, the defense argument gave no leeway to the prosecutor to argue that appellant had to corroborate his misidentification defense or non-evidence about police careers and retirement. *fn6
The question remains whether reversal of appellant's convictions is required since defense counsel failed to object at trial to the missing witness inference or the improper rebuttal argument. Watts v. United States, 362 A.2d 706, 709 (D.C. 1976). In Thomas, supra, the court made clear that "where the defendant's credibility is a key issue and the missing witness inference goes to that credibility, an improper argument or instruction will ordinarily require reversal." 447 A.2d at 59, quoted in Lawson, supra, 514 A.2d at 790. See Simmons, supra, 444 A.2d at 965; Coombs v. United States, 399 A.2d 1313, 1318 (D.C. 1979). The court has pointed out, moreover, that "repetition is an important factor in determining the gravity of such misconduct . . . ." Parks v. United States, 451 A.2d 591, 614 (D.C. 1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 945, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1303, 103 S. Ct. 2123 (1983); Dent v. United States, 404 A.2d 165, 172 (D.C. 1979). If, however, there is overwhelming evidence of a defendant's guilt or of a tactical choice by the defendant, then the alleged error does not effect a "miscarriage of Justice" requiring reversal of a conviction on appeal. See Allen v. United States, 495 A.2d 1145, 1152 (D.C. 1985).
Appellant's credibility was "all important to his defense." Haynes, supra, 318 A.2d at 903. See Thomas, supra, 447 A.2d at 60. His entire defense rested on the jury believing his testimony about his innocent behavior and his explanation of how the prerecorded $20 bill came to be found in the police cruiser. Some corroborative evidence was provided in the police transport log, which indicated that there was another run between the time appellant was picked up and his arrival at the police station. *fn7 Although three police officers testified for the government, only Officer Wallace was involved in the drug transaction. Wallace admitted that he never checked the alley where appellant claimed he had been playing craps. He also could not produce any documentation to confirm the serial number of the prerecorded $20 bill that he had used; he claimed that it had been stolen from his car. The officers' explanation of the transport log, in view of what was and was not stated in the report, was hardly compelling. Moreover, the transport log contained neither a log notation of recovery of $20 nor a notation of a vehicle check after appellant had been taken out of it. *fn8 The record is unclear about how close appellant was seen to the brown paper bag on the sidewalk, *fn9 and the discrepancies in appellant's testimony, noted by the prosecutor in his closing argument, were minor.
The government emphasizes that the testimony of the three officers corroborated each other, that the chain of custody of the cruiser was well established, and that the trial Judge instructed the jury that appellant was not required to produce any evidence and that the burden of proof never shifts. The jury is presumed to follow the instructions. See Hairston v. United States, 497 A.2d 1097, 1103 (D.C. 1985). These arguments, however, overlook the centrality of the credibility contest at issue and the fact that the jury was never instructed about how, if at all, it should view the so-called evidence that appellant did not call his friend or Jones as a witness or otherwise corroborate his misidentification defense. Long ago this court made clear that the trial court should not permit the prosecutor to make continued comments inviting the jury to speculate on the reason for the witnesses absence. Conyers, supra, 309 A.2d at 313. Here the prosecutor commented twice, once with respect to appellant's friend and again with respect to Jones. Further, having directed the jury's attention during cross-examination to the absence of individuals whose testimony could only have elucidated earlier events unrelated to the drug sale, the prosecutor proceeded to argue to the jury not only that appellant had failed to corroborate his misidentification defense, but that the testimony of the police officers was worthy of more belief because they put their careers and retirement on the line. *fn10 Appellant had no burden to produce any evidence, see United States v. Alston, 179 U.S. App. D.C. 129, 551 F.2d 315 (1976), and there was no evidence to support the comments about the policemen's careers and retirement. See Toliver, supra, 468 A.2d 958. Coming in rebuttal closing argument made the misconduct more prejudicial to a fair trial. See, e.g. Jones, supra, 512 A.2d at 257; Powell v. United States, 455 A.2d 405, 411 (D.C. 1982); see also Young, supra, 150 U.S. App. D.C. at 104 (proper argument by the prosecutor when combined with improper argument "may actually escalate the impact of the improper, just as some truth may bait the hook for the impact of a partial lie or libel").
The trial Judge did not indicate in any way to the jury that the cross-examination on the failure of appellant's friend and Jones to testify was improper, that the closing argument was improperly based on non-evidence, or that missing witnesses' testimony would have been of limited relevance to the issue of appellant's guilt. See Conyers, supra, 309 A.2d at 313; Young, supra, 150 U.S. App. D.C. at 104. The general instructions that the arguments of counsel are not evidence and that the government had to prove appellant's identification beyond a reasonable doubt were insufficient to cure the harm. See Logan, 489 A.2d at 488; Miller v. United States, 444 A.2d 13, 16 (D.C. 1982); Villacres v. United States, 357 A.2d 423, 428 (1976). Rather, portions of the Judge's instructions in combination with the prosecutor's argument had the effect of highlighting points that the prosecutor improperly made. *fn11
Accordingly, since the missing witness inference directly related to the issue of guilt, there were no curative instructions, and the evidence consisted primarily of the word of Wallace against that of appellant, and nothing in the record suggests that defense counsel's failure to object was a tactical decision, *fn12 we hold that the errors jeopardized the fairness of appellant's trial and reverse. *fn13
BELSON, Associate Judge, Dissenting: This court reviews claims of errors not objected to at trial only for "plain error." Watts v. United States, 362 A.2d 706, 709 (D.C. 1976) (en banc). Where, as here, the errors alleged were not raised before the trial court, they will not be treated as "plain error," i.e., cause for reversal, unless they result in a "miscarriage of Justice." United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 163, 71 L. Ed. 2d 816, 102 S. Ct. 1584 n.14 (1982). Stated otherwise, to show plain error an appellant must establish that the errors complained of were "so clearly prejudicial to substantial rights as to jeopardize the very fairness and integrity of the trial." Watts, supra, 362 A.2d at 709 (emphasis added). Although the majority opinion repeatedly refers to the issue as simply whether appellant has received a fair trial (Majority at 2, 6, 9, 15), it does refer at one point to the miscarriage of Justice standard (Majority at 10). The opinion then proceeds to conclude that the errors that occurred in this case "jeopardized the fairness of appellant's trial." In my view, the substance of what happened at trial does not come close to constituting the miscarriage of Justice that the majority apparently perceives.
At the outset, I agree with the majority that the prosecutor injected error into this case. As detailed in the majority opinion, at trial the prosecutor developed through cross-examination of the defendant the facts regarding the absence of a witness who apparently was in a position to give testimony favorable to the defense but was not called by the defense. The government concedes that it was improper for the prosecutor to engage in such cross-examination without first seeking the permission of the court, citing Arnold v. United States, 511 A.2d 399[, 416] (D.C. 1986) (counsel must request permission of the court before making an incomplete missing witness argument) and Sherrod v. United States, 478 A.2d 644[, 654] ("In the absence of a prior ruling on missing witnesses by the trial court, it would be improper for the prosecutor to pursue questining which would suggest to the jury that their testimony would be adverse to appellant."). As I have stated, however, in reviewing for plain error this court's inquiry must focus not on the propriety of the government's actions but on the overall fairness and integrity of the trial. The consideration of the prejudicial effect, if any, that the prosecutor's failure to approach the bench had on appellant's case, is really one of impact on the jurors. Experience over the years has established that jurors possess much wisdom and common sense and that they make good use of their combined life experiences. In this case, even if the prosecutor had not raised the matter, it would not have been lost on the jury that those persons who had allegedly been playing dice with appellant would have known what he was doing just before his arrest, and yet had not come into the courtroom to testify on his behalf. The jurors would undoubtedly have noticed, without assistance from the prosecutor, that appellant was the only person to testify that he was engaged with others in entirely innocent activities shortly before his arrest.
In addition, as the matter developed in this case, the jury heard the appellant's explanation for their absence--that they did not want to be put in a position in which the police might try to bring charges against them or harass them--an explanation that the jurors might find understandable. I therefore question the majority's Conclusion that the interrogation and the argument about witnesses substantially worsened appellant's position in the eyes of the jury.
The majority attempts in three ways to bolster the thesis that there was plain error in this case. First, the majority contends that no missing witness argument or instruction would have been allowable under the circumstances even had the government requested prior leave of the court. Indeed, it must be doubted that the majority would reverse absent this Conclusion. In my opinion, however, the majority's reasons for concluding that neither of the two requirements for the use of a missing witness argument could be met in this case will not stand scrutiny.
The majority opinion states that witnesses Raymond Jones and his friends "were not 'peculiarly within' appellant's power to produce" since appellant asked them to come into court and they had refused. (Majority at 8.) But is a party's mere statement that a potential witness is unwilling to come in to testify sufficient to establish that the opposing party cannot meet the first prong of the test? The defendant had compulsory process available to him. The majority opinion cites Thomas v. United States, 447 A.2d 52, 57-58 (D.C. 1982), apparently for the proposition that a defendant's statement that a knowledgeable witness has refused to testify precludes any reference to that person as a missing witness, but I see no statement in Thomas that supports the majority's thesis. It could hardly be said that a party's testimony about a witness' unwillingness to testify forecloses the question of the peculiar availability of that witness to the party.
With equal facility, the majority Opinion disposes of the second requirement--that the witnesses in question could not elucidate the transaction. The majority asserts that the missing witnesses were neither eyewitnesses to the drug transaction nor alibi witnesses. Appellant, however, testified that shortly before his arrest he was playing dice with two others and that he saw another man selling drugs nearby. Surely a witness who could testify that he was playing dice with appellant shortly before his arrest and that appellant was not engaged in the sale of drugs at that time could shed light on whether the appellant was the person who did the things that Officer Walsh described. For these reasons, I cannot join in the majority's Conclusion that the prosecutor's error in failing to approach the bench to get permission to enter the area of missing witness interrogation "was compounded since the missing witness inference never should have been allowed in this case."
Second, the majority assigns, I think, undue gravity to the missing witness argument by mislabeling it as a complete missing witness argument. A complete missing witness argument has been made when counsel directly urges the jury to draw from the fact of the witness' absence an inference adverse to the defendant. In this case, the prosecutor never invited the jury directly to draw the inference that if the witnesses had appeared their testimony would have been adverse to the appellant. The majority acknowledges that, by way of completion of the missing witness argument, the prosecutor merely argued in closing that appellant's version of the occurrence lacked any corroboration. While it is true that an indirect invitation to the jury to draw the forbidden inference may complete the missing witness argument, Arnold, supra, 511 A.2d at 416, I think the majority opinion strains when it states that the prosecutor's mere reference to a failure to offer corroboration completed the missing witness argument. In an attenuated analysis, the majority opinion explains that by focusing on the lack of corroboration for appellant's defense, the prosecutor called attention to the differences between the police officers' testimony and appellant's. This supposedly reminded the jurors of the witnesses that appellant had not called. Those two thoughts, juxtaposed, are said to have amounted to an implication to the jury that the missing witnesses' testimony would have been adverse to appellant. This argument, I contend, falls of its own weight and leaves us with the fact that this is not a case where the jury was asked to draw from the fact of the witnesses' absence an inference adverse to appellant. Thus, this case involves an incomplete, rather than a complete, missing witness argument. See Lawson v. United States, 514 A.2d 787, 790 (D.C. 1986). This is important because where a missing witness argument is unauthorized, the complete argument brings home the unpermitted argument more immediately and forcefully than the oblique or subtle suggestions of the incomplete argument.
Third, the majority notes that the government attempted to enhance the credibility of its police officer witnesses by referring to their interest in not jeopardizing their jobs and retirement by perjuring themselves. The majority opinion acknowledges that these comments standing alone would not be determinative of the outcome of this case but views the argument as exacerbating the missing witness error. It is true, as the majority opinion states, that the prosecutor's statements that the police officers had a great interest in protecting their jobs and retirement plans and thus would not jeopardize these interests by perjuring themselves, found no support in the evidence produced at trial. Yet, it is difficult to agree that much, if any, prejudice could flow from such an observation, for it is fair to assume that the jurors would think it quite natural that by being caught in perjury, a police officer would be jeopardizing his livelihood and retirement.
Finally, in order to reach its determination concerning plain error, it was necessary for the majority to assess the impact upon the jury of the errors and to consider the strength of the government's case. For the reasons expressed above, I view the errors as far from grave. I also take issue with the way in which the majority downplays the strength of the government's case.
Despite some debate about fringe matters, the government's case was quite substantial. An experienced police officer made an undercover buy of marijuana laced with PCP from appellant. He then gave a description of appellant. Several other officers soon located and detained appellant who matched the description. One of the officers searched the area where appellant had been standing, "an elevated area higher than the sidewalk," and found a brown paper bag containing three additional packets of marijuana treated with PCP. Appellant was then taken to another location where he was identified by the undercover buy officer as the person who had sold him the illegal drugs. The undercover officer paid for the buy with a twenty dollar bill, the serial number of which had been recorded by his partner. The serial number of a twenty dollar bill that was recovered from the back seat of the police cruiser in which appellant and a man picked up at another location were later transported matched that used in the undercover buy from appellant.
The foregoing facts alone make this fundamentally a very strong case. In addition, however, it is unlikely that there is a sufficient, innocent explanation, consistent with appellant's version of the events, for the presence of a bag containing additional drugs near him. Appellant was the only person in the vicinity of the place of his arrest. Indeed, he was the only person visible in the block at that time. It is most unlikely that some other drug dealer previously had abandoned his valuable stash and appellant simply happened to be standing nearby.
The majority opinion also, in my view, overemphasizes certain deficiencies in the police record concerning the marked police money which was recovered from the police cruiser after appellant emerged. The majority's focus on these imperfections would be more persuasive if this court were considering whether the errors in this case were harmless. But we are not. The question is whether the prosecutor's failure to approach the bench before engaging in missing witness questioning along with the lesser matters raised by the majority brought about "a miscarriage of Justice." To say that they do gives a new and significantly broadened meaning to that term.
Government counsel must be aware that whenever the prosecution fails to follow this court's admonition that it should get the approval of the trial court before it engages in missing witness interrogation, the prosecution may inject error into the case, prejudice the accused, and jeopardize any conviction that may result from the trial. Reversal, however, should not result when there is no objection at trial unless the error was so grievous and prejudicial to substantial rights as to bring about a miscarriage of Justice. For the reasons I have given above, that did not happen here. I Dissent. *fn1
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:
This mattress type is an excellent match for 26% of people.
Luxury Sleep at an Affordable Price.
The Alexander Signature Medium. An affordable alternative to more expensive name brand memory foam beds.
Combines durable, breathable high density gel memory foam, our SmartFlow Air Flow Foam, and the support of high quality Edge Support Base Foam.
The Signature Medium contains:
Fit: Recommended for people who...
|Prefer to sleep on their side
|Prefer to sleep on their back
|Prefer to sleep on their stomach
|Prefer medium softness
Function: Rated for its...
|Motion Isolation
|Pressure Relief
Features: Contains...
The Nest Bedding Alexander Signature Medium mattress model is recommended by 91% of owners on GoodBed (based on 414 ratings + 155 reviews).
Do you have a Nest Bedding Alexander Signature Medium mattress? Write a Review!
Read answer from Nest Bedding → product-information adjustable-beds foundations
Read answer from Nest Bedding → pillow-tops sagging surface-integrity
The Alexander Signature Medium is a euro top foam core medium mattress model released in 2014 that is part of the Alexander Signature Select product line manufactured by Nest Bedding.
Have an update or correction to our information about Nest Bedding Alexander Signature Medium? If so, please take a moment to suggest an edit.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Executive Summary
Elections can, and often do, matter for markets, but not necessarily for the reasons investors tend to emphasize. For example, there is little historical evidence that markets perform better or worse depending on which party occupies the White House. There is also no concrete evidence that markets do better under divided government, a myth that seems to have taken hold thanks to the bull market of the 1990s.
However, while the political alignment of a government has had little discernible impact on market performance, policy does. Economic positions, such as tax policy, have in the past influenced how financial markets behave. For investors looking to handicap the impact of November's elections, we believe there are three policy prisms through which to judge the outcome: potential for avoiding the "fiscal cliff," impact on tax policy, and the extent to which the outcome raises or lowers the likelihood of dealing with longer-term imbalances, specifically the unsustainable nature of the current entitlement system and the growing dysfunction of the US tax code.
In the near term, investors should focus on the elections' implications for the fiscal cliff, specifically the pending changes to tax rates. Given the fragility of the US consumer, should all or most of the fiscal drag hit on schedule, the risk of a recession would rise significantly. Any outcome that limits the fiscal drag is likely to be viewed as a positive, particularly as it relates to tax rates. In the past, rising marginal tax rates have exerted a modest, but significant, negative impact on equity markets; from an investing standpoint, investors should be more concerned over rising tax rates than lower government spending in 2013. The longer-term issue is broader tax reform, as the US tax code-particularly its growing instability-is arguably acting as an impediment to the recovery.
However, perhaps even more important for investors could be the impact of the elections on the longer-term economic and fiscal environment. The elections may determine at least two critical issues: entitlement and tax reform. Fiscal pressure will finally hit a tipping point later this decade as the full brunt of demographic shifts begins to hit pension and healthcare obligations, even though deficits are likely to fall in the coming years. The next administration is the last chance to adjust these programs before large deficits become structural. Should the election results fail to bring about a consensus on entitlement reform, the consequences could be even higher debt burdens that will impact the US economy for decades and be a game changer for the markets.
As investors begin to handicap the elections and discount their significance, we believe they should view it from the perspective of which configuration is most likely to tackle these problems. On that score, the recent polarization of Congress suggests that divided government is likely to make the task more difficult. As of this writing, that still appears to be the most likely outcome.
Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time.
E.B. White
If nothing else, the parties and participants will be more familiar. After a summer spent familiarizing ourselves with the nuances of Greek politics and the acronyms for the latest European bailout funds, a fall spent focusing on the more familiar-though arguably no less dysfunctional-Republicans and Democrats might be welcome. However, while the landscape is more familiar, the potential dangers are just as great. Whatever happens, the elections will matter for financial markets.
The backdrop to the elections is the US economy, which, while doing better than Europe, is struggling. By any metric this has been the weakest recovery in the post-World War II period. The consumer is still coping with the twin burdens of too much debt and too little income. With overall GDP growth at barely 2%, the economy remains dangerously close to "stall speed," a condition in which any exogenous shock can push the United States back toward recession.
This is the first reason the elections matter-the "fiscal cliff." If the elections produce another partisan and divisive outcome, this will, at the margin, make it more difficult to address the fiscal cliff in the relatively short period between the day after the elections and January 1. On the other hand, any outcome that allows for a quicker and more definitive solution should be market-friendly.
The elections also matter for the longer term, perhaps more so. Put simply, the day of reckoning is approaching for the United States to finally address its unsustainable fiscal path. In the absence of significant reform, the three large existing entitlement programs-Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid-will eventually consume the entire federal budget. Under current policies, by the end of the decade budget deficits are scheduled to start to rise again as the costs of Medicare and Medicaid explode. If structural reforms are not introduced during the next administration, the trillion dollar plus deficits of the past four years will eventually become structural, with significant long-term impacts on the markets.
The second long-term issue is the tax code. While never a paragon of logic or simplicity, in recent years it has become much worse. The proliferation of temporary provisions adds to the economic uncertainty and further discourages investment and spending at a time when the economy is struggling with anemic demand. Again, given the numerous headwinds facing the economy-a consumer deleveraging, uncertainty over the European Union and deteriorating demographics-over which the government has little or no control, it seems unnecessary to compound these issues with a tax code increasingly resembling a Rube Goldberg contraption, and an ever-changing one at that.
Myths Surrounding Elections and the Markets
Before addressing the issues that are likely to drive financial markets in the coming years, it is worth dispelling two myths that seem to persist about how elections impact the market.
Myth #1: Party affiliation of the president alone influences market returns.
There is little to no evidence to support this. Over the past century, which party occupies the White House has had no discernible or consistent impact on US equity markets. Since 1900, when a Democrat has been in the White House, the average return for the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) has been around 8.5%; for Republicans, the average has been around 6% (neither average includes dividends). When you adjust those averages for the market's volatility-the standard deviation on the DJIA's return has been roughly 22% over the past century-the numbers are statistically the same.[1] The party affiliation of the president has had no consistent influence on stock market performance.
Myth #2: Divided government is good for the financial markets.
Following the halcyon days of the 1990s, many investors have come to believe this. The argument goes that divided government moderates the worst instincts and excesses of each party. Another variant on this theme is that under divided government spending is constrained, as the parties will generally not agree on spending priorities. As a result, spending is low, tax receipts pile up and surpluses abound.
This was certainly true in the 1990s, but that seems to have been an anomaly. Looking at the last century of data, there is no evidence that divided government produces better returns. In fact, while the numbers are not statistically significant and should be taken with more than a grain of salt, in the past equities have actually done better when one party has controlled both Congress and the White House (see Figure 1).
The boom in the 1990s was a function of many factors: a secular drop in interest rates, the taming of inflation and a productivity surge as business integrated new technologies on a large scale. To be fair, there was also some modest spending restraint, but much of that can be attributed to the peace dividend following the end of the Cold War. None of these factors are repeatable nor can they be attributed to a government split by political affiliation.
Furthermore, while investors sometimes attribute the modest deficits and eventual surpluses of the late 1990s to Washington's temporary parsimony, there was another, more important factor at work-strong and unusually steady economic growth. The mid-to-late 1990s produced above-average revenue growth thanks to a booming economy. Not only was the growth strong, but it was also remarkably consistent to a degree rarely seen in the past and not seen since.
Between 1994 and 2000, government revenue increased by 8.3% a year, well ahead of the average since 1980 of around 5.3% (see Figure 2). Even more impressive was its stability. During that six-year period, the revenue growth range was relatively tight, from a high of 10.8% to a low of 7.4%.
Unfortunately, conditions are very different today, and the political composition in Washington is unlikely to change the underlying fundamentals that are hampering growth. From the perspective of the economy, the headwinds of the three Ds-debt, demographics and deleveraging-will exert a drag on growth regardless of the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. From the perspective of investors, the secular drop in inflation and interest rates has run its course. Having done so, no matter who wins in November we are unlikely to witness another round of multiple expansion similar to the 1990s.
What Does Matter: Policy
None of the above implies that the outcome of these elections is irrelevant for financial markets. While politicians cannot fix much of what ails the global economy, sensible economic policy would help mitigate the damage. There is also quite a bit that politicians can do to make matters worse. In short, the elections will matter a great deal. In one sense, typical political hyperbole is probably justified in that these will be pivotal elections for the economy and the country's economic future.
There are a number of issues, both long- and short-term, that can only be solved in Washington. The absence of progress will likely worsen the economic malaise and in the case of the fiscal cliff push the United States back into recession. On the other hand, real progress on taxes and entitlements could remove at least some of the headwinds holding back growth.
Starting with the fiscal cliff, it's worth quantifying just how significant a headwind this could be. Under current policy, the United States will experience roughly $600 billion of fiscal drag in 2013, with the lion's share in the form of higher taxes (see Figure 3). This fiscal drag will be equivalent to roughly 4% of GDP, a particularly large amount for an economy barely growing at 2%.
There are two reasons the fiscal cliff poses such an existential threat to the recovery. First is its size: the full brunt of the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and spending cuts would mark the largest fiscal drag in decades. The size of the tax hikes alone is equivalent to roughly 3.5% of GDP. By comparison, the next largest was a tax hike equivalent to approximately 1.7% of GDP in 1968, followed swiftly by an economic contraction in 1969.
The second risk revolves around the fragile state of the recovery. Despite four years of deleveraging, household debt is still at 112% of disposable income, versus 90% as recently as 2000 and a long-term average of 78% (source: Bloomberg, as of 6/30/12). Even with a perpetuation of the low rate environment, debt levels still appear unsustainable, suggesting several more years of deleveraging. In addition to high debt levels, income growth has been anemic over the past four years.
Furthermore, whatever small income growth consumers have enjoyed has been flattered by rising transfer payments from Washington. Since 2008, more than half of all growth in disposable income has come from increasing transfer payments. To the extent these are also impacted by the fiscal cliff-for example, extended unemployment benefits expire-this will further cut into disposable income growth, of which there is little to start with.
Should the fiscal cliff hit without substantial change, there is a reasonable chance that the US economy will slip back toward recession early next year, a view shared by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The latest CBO estimates (May 22, 2012) suggest that the fiscal drag will result in the economy contracting by approximately 1.3% during the first two quarters of 2013 and growing a paltry 0.5% for the entire calendar year. In addition, to the extent that the fiscal cliff looks likely, both businesses and households are likely to cut back their spending in anticipation of the hit, a factor that could exert a drag as early as fourth quarter of this year.
Should this occur, stocks are vulnerable. While equity markets have certainly discounted slow growth, valuations are not so low as to suggest that investors expect another recession. Evidence we're slumping toward that outcome is likely to push stocks lower and volatility higher.
From an investor's standpoint, there is another concern: historically, rising individual tax rates have been negative for stocks, even when higher taxes have not led to an outright recession. Figure 4 provides a partial history of major changes to the tax code. While there are certainly exceptions, in the past rising marginal rates have not been good for stocks.
Since 1917, rising taxes-defined by a higher top marginal rate-have been associated with lower equity returns (see Figure 5). While the impact is not massive, historically changes in the top marginal tax rate have explained a significant portion of US equity market returns.
In fact, a simple model regressing annual equity returns on changes in the top marginal tax rate actually produces reasonable results. The model assumes an average return of approximately 8.6%, very close to the long-term average for the DJIA of around 7.2% net of dividends. The basic formula is that for every 1% increase in marginal rate, DJIA return tends to drop around 0.5%. Not huge, but the relationship is statistically significant. Interestingly, there has been no similar relationship between changes in government spending and equity returns. If the past is to be prelude, then from the perspective of an equity investor, the pending tax hikes - not a reduction in government spending - are the real risks to the market.
Entitlement Reform: Our Can-Kicking Days are Coming to an End
These elections will likely influence financial markets well beyond 2013. From healthcare to military spending, the composition of the next government will influence both growth rates and how that growth is allocated. For investors, there are at least two big macro issues to focus on-entitlement spending and tax reform. Let's start with the former, which is simply unsustainable, a condition that will probably become apparent before the end of the next presidential term.
According to the Census Bureau's 2010 report, over the next decade the number of Americans 65 and older will increase from 40 million, or 13% of the population, to 54 million, or 16% of the population. And due to longer life expectancy, as well as the large number of aging baby boomers, the percentage of Americans over 65 will continue to rise with time. By 2035, there will be 77 million Americans over the age of 65, accounting for approximately 20% of the population.[2]As we discussed in our June Market Perspectives (see "Not so Golden Years"), this will wreak havoc with the US entitlement system.
Historically, US taxes have equated to approximately 18.5% of GDP. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that by 2050 the combined costs of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will exceed this level. In other words, without massive tax increases (or changes in programs), within 40 years these three programs will consume all the revenue of the federal government.[3]
In addition to the question of unfunded liabilities, there is the more immediate problem of ever-growing federal debt. The longer these issues remain unresolved, the more debt will add to an already significant burden.
As of the end of June, US gross federal debt was approximately $15.7 trillion, equivalent to roughly 97% of GDP. Looking at debt held by the public-which excludes those Treasuries held by the Social Security Trust Fund-the picture looks slightly less threatening. But even under this calculation, federal debt is roughly $10.5 trillion, up from less than $5 trillion as recently as 2008. Assuming current law and policies are extended-known in budget parlance as the extended alternative scenario-by 2022 publicly traded federal debt will exceed 90% of GDP, and by 2026 it will exceed its historical peak of 109%.
Leaving aside the moral and political issues, debt of this magnitude is likely to exert a significant economic drag. In their recent paper "Debt Overhangs: Past and Present," Carmen Reinhardt, Vincent Reinhardt and Kenneth Rogoff quantified the impact of large sovereign debt burdens on growth.[4] The authors find that prior instances of debt levels above 90% of GDP are associated with an average growth rate of 2.3% (median 2.1%) compared to 3.5% during lower debt periods. In other words, high debt burdens reduce long-term growth rates by roughly one-third.
Even more important is how long this debt "hangover" impacts growth. The average duration of debt overhang episodes was an astonishing 23 years.
To state the obvious, should we allow to this occur, it would be a game changer for US financial markets. While investors have reconciled themselves to another year or two of sluggish growth, there is little to suggest that the market has discounted another one to two decades in the slow lane. Such an environment would require rethinking long-term assumptions on earnings growth and margins, and by extension what is a reasonable multiple for a market.
If the next administration cannot begin to make a dent in the fiscal position, investors should reconsider the long-term argument for US stocks, or at the very least demand a larger discount to reflect a secular deceleration in growth rates. At the same time, under this scenario, the risk of Japanese-style stagnation becomes more of a threat, and investors may need to reconcile themselves to a semi-permanent state of low yields.
Spin the Wheel: Next Year's Tax Rate
In addition to entitlement programs and the debt build-up, the tax code has arguably become a significant impediment to growth, not just in the distant future but today. While this topic could consume many tomes, consider two aspects that are most impacting US competitiveness-high corporate rates and the growing instability of the tax code.
The United States now has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the developed world. While it is true that a series of loopholes and credits means that few companies pay the marginal rate, the high rate coupled with complexity has become an unnecessary burden on business (see Figure 6). Nor is it clear that the current code is producing much revenue. As a percentage of GDP, corporate taxes are 1.2% and were as low as 1% in 2009, down dramatically from their recent peak of 2.7% in 2007. While some of this is clearly due to the impact of the recession, today's numbers compare poorly with other recessions. In 2001, tax revenues were still 1.5% of GDP and in 1992 they bottomed at 1.6% of GDP.[5]
Furthermore, the United States is the only industrialized OECD country that continues to employ a worldwide system of taxation. The high tax rate and the potential for double taxation, while somewhat mitigated by provisions such as deferral and the foreign tax credit, harm the ability of US companies to compete against foreign companies that face little or no home country tax.[6]
There is a second issue that is adding to the uncertainty plaguing business, as well as individuals. Whether Republican or Democrat, most would agree that predictability is a desirable feature in a tax code. Unfortunately, over the past decade the US tax code has moved in the opposite direction.
There are different ways to measure this, but simply consider the growing number of temporary provisions embedded in the tax code. In contrast to the 25 expiring expenditures in the 1985 tax code, 2010 had more than 141 provisions that would expire within two years. Many of these provisions were renewed again with the passing of the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.[7]
The absence of clarity is arguably another headwind restraining corporate spending. Given that the corporate sector is the one segment of the US economy with the wherewithal to dramatically increase spending, lingering uncertainty over the tax code is an unnecessary hindrance. There are bipartisan efforts currently in both the House and Senate to study ways to improve the tax code. A political outcome that supports those efforts and leads to more certainty could help spur some increase in capital spending and potentially hiring, and with it faster growth.
Will Anything Be Settled In November?
From an investment standpoint, the best outcome in November would be some consensus that enables government to begin to tackle both the short- and long-term policy issues. What are the odds that this will happen? As of today, the most likely scenario is a continuation of divided government. Whether that translates into a consensus on reform remains to be seen.
Starting with the presidency, despite the weak recovery most factors still favor a second Obama term. This rests on several principles. First, the odds greatly favor an incumbent. Since World War II, only three sitting presidents have lost re-election: President Ford in 1976, President Carter in 1980 and President Bush, Sr. in 1992. In all three elections, the sitting president was hampered by a primary challenge from their party's flank, something that President Obama has not had to contend with. Second, most polls still show a small but meaningful lead for the president. More importantly, polls in swing states further favor the president.
The election will be won or lost in the Electoral College, and will ultimately depend on a few key swing states. Currently, the electoral math provides more paths to victory for President Obama than it does for Governor Romney. Based on analysis by The New York Times, Obama has 217 likely electoral votes, with 185 solid, while Mitt Romney has 206 likely votes, with 158 solid. While exact numbers differ, most analysts acknowledge the existing math.
The counterpoint to the above argument, and the main reason the election is likely to be excruciatingly close, is the economy, and more specifically the jobs market. No president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has won re-election with the unemployment rate above 7.4%. As of May, unemployment stood at 8.2% and few economists expect it to be much different on Election Day. That said, given the advantages of incumbency and the realities of the Electoral College, the odds still favor a narrow victory for the president.
Turning to the Senate, current polls suggest that whichever party controls the Senate in 2013 will enjoy the narrowest of margins and no party looks even remotely likely to capture a filibuster-proof majority (60 seats or more). Currently, Democrats hold a narrow majority of seats, 53 to 47. That is likely to narrow even further in 2013, if for no other reason than that the Democrats will be forced to defend more open seats.
Senate Democrats are defending 23 seats, while Republicans need only defend 10. Just as with the president, incumbency confers a huge advantage in Senate races, suggesting that Republicans are likely to pick up several seats. The most likely outcome next January is a Senate nearly evenly divided, with no party holding more than a one or two seat majority. Given Senate rules, the minority party will still be likely to hold most legislation hostage. Absent a major swing, it looks highly likely that the House of Representatives will remain in Republican hands.
A more quantitative look at the odds supports the likelihood for a continuation of divided government. The Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM) is currently pricing in roughly a 70% chance of divided government in the elections (22% chance of a Republican sweep, 10% chance of a Democratic sweep).[8]
Assuming this is the case, what are the prospects for more compromise, or at least more compromise compared to the last Congress? While it has become a cliché to say that Washington has become more divided and compromise more difficult to reach, there is actually a fair amount of evidence to support this thesis.
Figure 7 measures partisan votes in the House of Representatives. Based on this study, it is not an exaggeration to say that politics is more partisan than at any time in living memory. The two parties are more ideological than at any time since the post-Civil War period and it is simply becoming rarer for Congressmen to cross party lines on a vote.
Nor is this dynamic confined to the House. Most people typically think of the Senate as the more deliberative and less partisan body, but using the same methodology, polarization in the Senate is also at the highest level since the late 19th century. This situation is likely to be exacerbated by the retirement of several moderates from the Senate. The hard fact is that in the current environment, compromises like the 1986 tax reform or the 1996 welfare reform look unlikely.
Never put off until tomorrow, what you can do the day after tomorrow.
Mark Twain
For several years now the US government has faithfully been following Mark Twain's admonition. Whether due to an historically high level of partisanship or an all too human desire to avoid hard choices, Washington has been unable to provide any long-term solutions to issues as far ranging as entitlement spending to the nature of the US tax code. This has hurt financial markets, but to the extent that other countries were in worse shape-at least nobody speculated as to whether the United States of America would exist next year, a comment that doesn't hold for the European Union-the circumstances were not as dire as they might have been. To date, the United States has benefited in a very real way from Europe's dislocations. As Europe has faced an existential crisis, the dollar has rallied and yields have plunged. Rightly or wrongly, investors rushed to what has been perceived as the last safe haven.
However, in a few months' time market attention is likely to shift 3,000 miles to the West, from Brussels and Berlin to Washington. The risks surrounding European banks and sovereign debt will not go away, but this fall US politics are likely to increasingly drive investor sentiment. From the fiscal cliff to the long-term solvency of the federal government, markets may not be as forgiving of further procrastination.
In the near term, bitter and divisive elections that produce more stalemate will make it more difficult to avoid the pending fiscal drag. Even assuming this can be postponed, US economic growth is dependent on a number of structural issues: a sensible overhaul of the tax code and reforms of the long-term entitlement state. If the elections make either of these more likely, a rally is probably justified. If, on the other hand, we wake up on the morning of November 7 with continued divided government and no consensus on reform, an inconclusive outcome in other words, Europe may no longer be the biggest problem child in the global economy.
[1] Source: Bloomberg. Standard deviation is a measure of how widely values are dispersed from the average value (the mean).
[2] Census Bureau, U.S. Population Projections. Accessed at www.census.gov/population/www/projections/summarytables.html, accessed February 10, 2010.
[3] Investment Outlook, PNC, E William Stone, CFA CMT, June 2012.
[4]Debt Overhangs: Past and Present, Carmen S. Reinhart, Vincent R. Reinhardt, and Kenneth S. Rogoff. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, April 2012.
[5] Tax Policy Center Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. Accessed at http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205, accessed July 3, 2012.
[6] Statement of the US Chamber of Commerce. Hearing on the Need for Comprehensive Tax Reform to Help American Companies Compete in the Global Market and Create Jobs for American Workers, May 12, 2011.
[7]Lessons from the 1986 Tax Reform Act: What Policy Makers Need to Learn to Avoid the Mistakes of the Past, Jason Fichtner and Jacob Feldman. Mercatus Center, George Mason University, April 2011.
[8] US Economic Viewpoint, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, May 30, 2012.
Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours.
Additional disclosure: For a complete discussion of risks and other important information regarding this content, please go here.


text:
♥ Add EpisodeTube.com to your favorite bar.
Zoo S01E11
|Watch Online Zoo: Season 1 Episode 11 (S01E11) Stream
Eats, Shoots and Leaves
Plot: Chloe is taken hostage by someone she knows; Jackson and the others make it to Zambia and try to find an animal to test Mitch's theory to cure the mutation.
Together with Episode 12
Video Links Server Name Language Quality


text:
Search By Vehicle
No attributes to narrow your search.
Anzo USA Tail Light Set 311121 03-06 ESCALADE LED TAIL LIGHTS LED ALL BLACK NO RED CAP
Tail Light Assembly
Availability: Ships from Manufacturer Typically in 1-3 Business Days, Depending on Availability!
Pricing: $311.30
Tail Light Assembly, LED, Clear Lens, Black Housing, Pair, . Guaranteed To Improve Your Vehicles Appearance. Rigorously Tested For Fit And Function. Simple Plug And Play. No Modifications Required. Easy Installation Using Common Hand Tools. Uses Stock Mounting Locations And Hardware. D.O.T. Compliant To S.A.E. Standards. Sold As A Pair. Does Not Fit Escalade EXT Models.
Does Not Fit Escalade EXT Models
Extended Information
- 1
- 8512202000
- 2 Available to Order
- 311121
- 311121
- 810169020821
- Anzo USA
- Ships from Manufacturer Typically in 1-3 Business Days, Depending on Availability!
- New
Shipping Information
- Item Requires Shipping
- 8.1 lbs.
- W16.2525" x H9.7515" x L17.5527"
Customer Reviews
Total Reviews (0)
Write the First Review!
You must login to post a review.


text:
Cherry Cakes
Total Time
Prep 20 mins
Cook 12 mins
My mom made these as long as I could remember and this is one of the recipes I got from her when I became a Mom -- these cookies rank still among my favourites almost 60 years later.
Ingredients Nutrition
- 1 cup butter
- 3⁄4 cup brown sugar
- 1 egg yolk
- 2 cups sifted flour
- candied cherries or maraschino cherry, halved
- Cream together butter and brown sugar.
- Add egg yolk and mix well.
- Add flour gradually, knead with hands until dough is soft and smooth. Form small balls and place on oiled pan.
- Put 1/2 cherry in center of each, slightly squashing each ball of dough. Bake at 400F 12 to 15 minutes.


text:
Update your password regularly to keep your account safe.
Elite Status Progress
Lifetime Diamond
With Lifetime Diamond, there is no expiration and no re-qualifying for your status - ever again!
Skip brand navigation
skip form
Where do you want to go?
City, Airport, Address, Attraction, Hotel
No search results found.
results were found. Press up and down key to select.
Use flexible dates
Promotion/Offer Code:
Group Code:
Corporate Account:
HHonors Points
Travel Agent
AAA Rate *
AARP Rate *
Senior Rate *
Government / Military Rates *
* ID required at check-in
Skip secondary navigation
At Hilton, dining options are designed with you in mind. Start the day with a hearty breakfast or nutritious light bite; savour innovative dishes prepared with only the freshest ingredients, or simply relax with a cup of coffee in the hotel lounge. From business brunches to pre-dinner drinks and everything in between, the options at Hilton are catered especially for you.
All-day dining is available in Lvyi Restaurant, serving breakfast, buffet dinner and Western favorites. Dinner is not all-year-round and depends on the season.
Located at the main entrance, Lobby Lounge is the best place to enjoy a drink with friends after a day exploring the mountain.
Located on the first floor of Yunxilou, enjoy lunch and dinner in this specialty restaurant offering Asian and local flavor cuisine.
Sanqing Pavillion, our terrific Chinese restaurant, offers tantalizing Cantonese cuisine and local dishes. Complete with eight private dining rooms and space for up to 350 guests, this is a great option for a group meal or wedding.


text:
Slide to see the images
Hi! My name is Ronaldo and I was named after the soccer star, Cristiano Ronaldo. Like the human Ronaldo, I have a flashy playing style. Why just kick a ball when you can jump into the air and do a scissor kick?
When I'm not practicing my soccer drills I enjoy cuddling with my brothers Beckham and Pele, climbing cat trees, and talking to the volunteers!
If you want your own sweet and playful soccer star, come on down to Cat Angels for a visit and a game of ball!


text:
Yeoteuna the past, fat woman, now a popular writer and columnist Kyungmin successful. Four alumni Taejin, jaeuk, inseop, sort appeared before her stunning.
Subscribe to: Post Comments ( Atom )
Download Film Terbaru 2016, Box Office 21, Nonton Streaming Drama Korea Subtitle Indonesia, dan Trailer Movie Gratis Update dan Lengkap.


text:
20 mile radius
Please introduce a postcode to use this feature
Peter Symonds is a vibrant and positive place to study, maximising students' academic potential and ensuring that students' talents are nurtured.
Went on this course and found it to be most enjoyable. Liz brings most material...more
This course runs termly (autumn, spring and summer), so although all courses are for beginners, please bear in mind that if you start in the summer term, the course has already been running for 2 terms,...more
Duration: 11 weeks
Part time day
No Qualification
Are you one of the millions of Brits who doesn't do the recommended amount of weekly physical activity? It's two and a half hours a week if you weren't sure. Or perhaps you're already a self-motivated fitness guru? It doesn't matter if you're a...
Bored of your usual gym workout, or lacking the motivation to actually get there? Here on the Hotcourses editorial desk, ask us the calories of any food and we could probably make an accurate guess. Aside from being one of our favourite topics of...


text:
O2living is an all-embracing community dedicated to a lifestyle, philosophy, and culture of health and wellness. "The state of wellness has always been a matter of importance if one wants to enjoy the human experience with passion and desire." - Rosemary Devlin
Read Now
As the name suggests, fresh vegetables and fruits are "pressed" so the maximum amount of nutrients are extracted. No heat is added in this process. The result? The highest quality of juice available – light, delicious and full of nutrients.
Learn More
O2living in Cross River, New York is designed to prepare you for a life of wellness by integrating living yoga, holistic spa treatments, variety of healthy recipes, juice cleansing, individualized health support/diet assessment and much more.
View Studio Calendar
We've been hearing a lot about chlorophyll recently - but what are the benefits? Click to read more about why you should be eating (or juicing) your greens!Read More
Healthy lunches can sometimes be hard to make when your work schedule becomes busy! Whipping up these healthy tuna-stuffed avocados are not only easy to make, but very healthy!Read More


text:
Free personalized radio that
plays the music you love
Last Dance At The Old Texas Moon
Features of This Trackcountry rock leanings
folk influences
a subtle use of vocal harmony
a twelve-eight time signature
major key tonality
slide guitars
electric pianos
acoustic rhythm guitars
solo strings
triple note feel
These are just a few of the hundreds of attributes cataloged for this track by the Music Genome Project.show more
Similar Tracks
Don't have a Pandora account? Sign up
Already have a Pandora account? Log In


text:
This website uses cookies. For more information please contact us or consult our privacy policy.
Your binder contains too many pages, the maximum is 40.
We are unable to add this page to your binder, please try again later.
This page has been added to your binder.
James specializes in handling complex white collar defense, internal investigations, and anti-corruption matters. He has represented multinational companies in sensitive investigations in China, and Chinese companies and financial institutions in litigation, regulatory and transactional matters in the United States. In particular, he has extensive experience with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the Antiterrorism Act (ATA), the anti-money laundering and Know-Your-Customer provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), as well as with various transactional compliance matters, such matters related to Sino-U.S. joint ventures and mergers and acquisitions. As a native Chinese, fluent English speaker, and U.S.-trained lawyer, Mr. Yuan is able to help clients navigate sensitive cross-border legal, regulatory, and cultural issues.
October 7, 2016, Covington Alert
On September 29, 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") issued letters of declination to NCH Corporation ("NCH") and HMT LLC ("HMT"). Both companies are Texas-based "domestic concerns." The letter to NCH, an industrial supply and maintenance company, relates to an investigation into possible violations of the anti-bribery provisions of the U.S. Foreign ...
May 6, 2016, Insight
February 29, 2016, Covington Alert
February 2016, China Guiding Cases Project, Stanford Law School
June 15, 2015, China Guiding Cases Project, Stanford Law School
2011, Legal System and Society, Vol. 18
Spring 2009, Southern University Law Review, Vol. 36, No.2


text:
Empleos de Diseño Gráfico en Orizaba
…Health Statistics and Quality to operate the BHSIS. Eagle Technologies is seeking a graphic designer to produce creative designs for web applications for the
…Participates in special projects as required. Bachelors Degree in Fine Arts or Graphic Design , or the equivalent combination of education, technical training, or
Job Description: Duties and Responsibilities: Under general supervision, develops graphic artwork in a variety of media (print and electronic) for the development of
… Designer / Information Management; Specialist;? Required :? - Experience in creative graphic design - Experience in user experience (UX);? - Experience with
…Budget: Under $200. Additional description: I am in need of a book cover designer for a Middle Grade Fantasy novel.. Printing services needed?: No, I do not
…Project scope: One-time project. Budget: Under $200. Additional description: I'm looking for a graphic artist to help with my laundromat. I'm going to need help with
…Additional description: Fitness DVD cover. Printing services needed?: No, I do not need help with printing. Printing service details: (Intentionally left blank).
Design and layout a wide variety of print materials, such as newspaper and Gameday magazine advertisements, flyers, brochures, posters, postcards, direct mail pieces
Graphic Designers at an engineering firm? Yes!We are seeking a graphic designer to join the Mid-Atlantic marketing team in VHB's Tysons, VA, office. This


text:
Here ericdress.com shows customers a fashion collection of current necklaces with initials.You can find many great items. They all have high quality and reasonable price. You can get big discount sometimes, because we always do promotions. If you need necklaces with initials,come here to choose. We give you good items and services.
Ericdress Unique Golden Chain Necklace with Earring
Ericdress Chic Golden Necklace with Earring
Ericdress Red Flower with Rhinestone Pendant Necklace
Ericdress Two Blue Flowers with Tassels Necklace
Ericdress Golden Chain LOVE Necklace with Earring
Ericdress Starfish Diamante Golden Necklace with Earring
Ericdress Lace Flowers with Pearl Choker Necklace
Ericdress Gold Plated with Rhinestone Women Necklace
Ericdress Black Flower with Tassels Necklace
Ericdress Flower with Rhinestone Pendant Necklace
Ericdress Cross with Rhinestone Jewelry Set
Ericdress Stars with Rhinestone Design Velvet Choker Necklace
130cm Length Fascinating Bride's Headflower With Pearl With Jacket/Shawl
Ericdress Leaf Pendant with Rhinestone Anklet
Classy Crown Silver Ring With Crystal
Ball Shaped with Little Rhinestone Ring
Luxurious Boutique Alloy with Diamond Ring
Ericdress Vintage Alloy Bracelet With Ring
Ericdress Heart With Arrow Open Ring
Platinum Plated with Green Zircon Ring
Platinum Plated with Yellow Zircon Ring
Ericdress Daisy with Rhinestone Design Opening Bracelet
Hot Selling Alloy with Rhinestone Including Headwear
Ericdress Alloy with Tassels Jewelry Set


text:
Slide to see the images
4 year young girl who loves to be brushed and petted. Beautiful long orange and white tabby striped coat. Very playful. Good with other cats.
If you would like to add a beautiful and friendly cat to your home, please submit an application at http://kgarl.rescuegroups.org/forms/form?formid=3400
Animals listed with "KGAC" in their names are not available through the King George Animal Rescue League, but through King George Animal Control. Please contact the shelter for details.
KGAC Contact Info
11377 Citizens' Way
King George, VA 22485
Business Hours: 540-775-2120
KG Sheriff's Office: 540-775-2049
KGAC Hours of Operation
Monday through Friday 10 - 4:30
Saturday 10 -1
Sunday and Holidays Closed
KGAC General Information
The shelter is located at 11377 Citizens Way, King George, VA 22485. If you have an interest in this pet, please call the shelter at 540-775-2120; leave a message if they do not answer and call back during normal business hours. KGAC is a county shelter, and, although their euthanasia rates are kept low, they are still a kill shelter and all animals are considered urgent.
Adoption Information
Unsterilized animals may only be adopted by residents within King George, Westmoreland, Essex, Caroline, Spotsylvania, or Stafford Counties, and the city of Fredericksburg. Animals that are already spayed or neutered can be adopted by anyone. Adopters pay $25 adoption fee, along with a $50 deposit for unaltered animals. Fees must be paid in cash. Residents of King George have first option on available animals over other individuals & organizations. Other eligible adopters may adopt available animals on a first come, first serve basis.
Non-profit Animal Rescue Groups
501(c)3 animal rescue groups will need to ensure the correct documentation is on file with the KGAC prior to pulling animals. KGAC will require a 501(c)3 determination letter, and No Cruelty Disclosure statement to be faxed (540-775-5770), as per Virginia standards. The No Cruelty Disclosure statement must be on the rescue organization's official letterhead and signed by a head officer of their organization. The No Cruelty Disclosure statement will need to confirm that no one in the organization has been convicted of animal cruelty. Once documentation is approved by KGAC, the rescue will be eligible to pull animals from the shelter.


text:
Having unnecessary fat in numerous areas of your body can have a significant effect on your health and self-esteem. While standard weight-loss through workout and diet plan is a terrific way to drop weight in general, even the very best exercises cannot target issue areas like the stomach, inner thighs, arms, and buttocks. Liposuction is a time evaluated treatment that is utilized to eliminate excess fat from specific locations of the body, enabling an individual to shape and contour their body to their taste. Is liposuction right for you? Discover now.
Pros of Liposuction
There are lots of advantages to this cosmetic treatment, consisting of:
• Immediately obvious modifications. Unlike conventional weight-loss, liposuction creates modifications that are instantly visible in the body. Some distinction is obvious right away, and the wanted results are normally attained in just a couple of days.
• Proven and safe. This cosmetic procedure has actually been performed by seasoned cosmetic surgeons all over the world for many years and the technique has actually been fine-tuned over and again to be safe and reliable.
• Recovery time is usually quick. The downtime needed after having this type of treatment is typically much less than what is required for other kinds of cosmetic procedures, consisting of abdominoplasty, breast reduction, and more. People who have had the treatment can frequently return to work much more quickly than they anticipated and can get back to living a healthy, active way of life.
• Weight loss can be long-term. With the ideal maintenance techniques, the fat that was removed during the liposuction procedure will not return.
• Complete control over your physique. With liposuction, a person can have complete control over how they wish to look, beyond what conventional diet plan and workout can supply. Giving people this power over their bodies increases self-esteem and aid people feel their best.
While there countless advantages to liposuction, there are of course a few cautions that should be thought about before making the final decision to progress with the treatment.
Cons of Liposuction
Before having actually liposuction done, it is necessary to examine the possible downsides of the treatment and figure out if the advantages exceed the dangers in your particular case. Your specialist can help you learn more about the dangers related to the treatment and can assist you decide if moving on is the ideal thing for you.
• Problems with general anesthesia. Since liposuction is carried out under general anesthesia, the treatment carries the exact same threats as other kind of surgery where general anesthesia is utilized. Hidden medical conditions might increase these threats.
• Unfavorable responses. Bruising, bleeding, and discomfort are all to be expected, nevertheless, in unusual cases can trigger more substantial issues.• The prospective to get the weight back. After having liposuction done, it is vital to keep a healthy diet and workout appropriately as suggested by your doctor. Failure to do so could lead to acquiring back the weight that was lost or possibly a lot more.
There are dangers associated with liposuction, for numerous people, the advantages far outweigh them. Educate yourself about the treatment by having thorough conversations with your specialist and consider how liposuction has the prospective to impact you as a special individual. Just you and your cosmetic surgeon can identify if liposuction will supply you with the outcomes you are searching for within your expectations.
Laser Liposuction procedure is a new non invasive procedure to loose unwanted bodyfat in Bruner MO
Laser liposuction is a newer, minimally invasive procedure that includes heating the fat cells to melting point and eliminating the melted fat through a little cannula. The treatment is normally done right in your physician's office and is an excellent alternative for people who have less than 500 ml of fat to get rid of from any one area. Laser liposuction can be a safe, complementary treatment to weight loss in order to sculpt the body you've always wanted.
Contact a Surgeon in your Bruner MO today.
If you're considering liposuction as a weight-loss solution, it's important that you discuss your desires with a qualified cosmetic surgeon in your location. Your cosmetic surgeon will perform a total exam and health history survey to determine if liposuction can benefit you and assist you reach your physical and emotional goals. Call today for an assessment and learn more about how liposuction can help you achieve the body of your dreams.


text:
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone Driver Download
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone Driver Details:
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone File Name: asus_v3-p5p43_barebone.zip
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone Driver Version: 52526jwE7
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone ZIP Size: 147.kb
Manufacturer: Asus
Scan Status: OK
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone special revision for: Windows 7 Home Premium 32 bit, Windows Vista Home Premium 32 bit, Windows XP Media Center Edition 64 bit, Windows XP Home Edition N 32 bit, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2003 64 bit, Windows XP Starter Edition 32 bit, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2004 32 bit, Windows XP 64-bit Edition 32 bit, Windows Vista Starter 64 bit, Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 32 bit, Windows Vista Ultimate 32 bit
Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone Download Stats:
Direct Downloads: 158
Most Recent Download: 12/9/2016
Managed Downloads: 4285
Most Recent Download: 12/8/2016
Download Mirrors: 4
Current Delay: 10 Seconds
Driver License: Free Software
Direct Download Success Stats:
Reports Issued By 136/158 Users
Success Reported By 16/136 Users
Driver Download Score71/100
Driver Installation Score70/100
Overall preformance Score71/100
Installation Manager Success Stats:
Reports Issued By 3954/4285 Users
Success Reported By 3393/3954 Users
Driver Download Score81/100
Driver Installation Score95/100
Overall preformance Score88/100
1. Direct DownloadSelect your OS and press "Download".
This option requires basic OS understanding.
Select Your Operating System, download zipped files, and then proceed to
manually install them.
Recommended if Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone is the only driver on your PC you wish to update.
2. Driver Installation Manager
This option requires no OS understanding.
Automatically scans your PC for the specific required version of Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone + all other outdated drivers, and installs them all at once.
After downloading and installing Asus V3-p5p43 Barebone, or the driver installation manager, take a few minutes to send us a report:
* Only registered users can upload a report.
Don't have a password?
Please register, and get one.


text:
Krewe of Centaur Captain Speaks out about Calls for Parade Changes
Should the parades be moved out of Broadmoor? Randy James, Captain of the Krewe of Centaur discusses the concerns of residents in that area.
Should the parades be moved out of Broadmoor? Randy James, Captain of the Krewe of Centaur discusses the concerns of residents in that area.
More reports are coming in about problems during the Krewe of Centaur Parade in Shreveport on Saturday night.
Record crowds were reported for the Krewe of Centaur on Saturday, but there were some problems., but there were some problems.
Mardi Gras moves into high gear in Shreveport Bossier this weekend. The Krewe of Centaur parade rolls at 4:30 Saturday afternoon from Clyde Fant and Lake Street.
We're less than two short weeks away from Fat Tuesday and Mardi Gras season is heating up in the Ark-La-Tex. With that said, revelers have plenty of activities to choose from this weekend!
The mighty Krewe of Centaur celebrated 25 years in the Ark-La-Tex Saturday, January 16, 2016 at the Shreveport Convention Center and everyone there witnessed a breathtaking spectacle!
Mardi Gras Madness is truly in full swing in Northwest Louisiana with FIVE EVENTS this weekend! We sure hope you're ready to let the good times roll this weekend!
SPAR is holding a lottery to reserve spots at Shreveport's January and February Mardi Gras parades. The Krewe of Centaur parade is Saturday, January 30, 2016 and the Krewe of Gemini parade is February 6, 2016...
If you're ready to catch your wight in beads this Saturday at the Krewe of Centaur Parade February 7th, the folks from Centaur have a few tips for you!
I can't believe the Krewe of Centaur Bal has finally come and gone! Movies, Music and Mayhem, the Krewe of Centaur's Grand Bal XXIV was this weekend and my husband Keith and I were honored to be a part of the royal court.


text:
Listen to all music and sounds of Alias Grace (Nance) and follow this user by signing in for free.
You can listen to 20 tracks and mixes and follow this user as 232 did before.
This artist liked 273 tracks, followed 232 others and reshared 100 tracks and mixes. 598 other people are following this page too.


text:
Gov. Mark Dayton said Friday that the proposed Minnesota Vikings stadium in Arden Hills is "appealing to the Vikings" but may not be in the best interest of Minnesotans.
In an interview with the Star Tribune, the governor expressed concerns regarding the planned stadium in Ramsey County, saying that the team would control much of the project and that a proposed five-member stadium authority that he would help appoint would have limited authority.
"I could see why that would be appealing to the Vikings. I don't know why Ramsey County agreed to it," Dayton said of the overall plan.
"The way it is now," he said of the plan, "this narrow [stadium] authority of five people just deeds it over to the Vikings to run and realize all the revenues and everything else."
The governor said he had concerns over the "control of the stadium site, control of the, you know, stadium itself and its operations."
The Vikings and Ramsey County announced their plan Tuesday to build a 65,000-seat stadium in Arden Hills, with the team contributing $407 million and the county raising $350 million for the project through a county wide half percent sales tax increase. The state, under the plan, would contribute $300 million.
Rep. Morrie Lanning, R-Moorhead, the chief House author of the stadium legislation, set a high bar Friday for a stadium proposal to pass the Legislature in the 10 days before it adjourns on May 23.
"In order for us to move a bill forward, we have to be assured that our limit of $300 million [in state contributions] is kept, that the details are workable [and] acceptable to us," said Lanning, "and that the governor supports whatever road we're on.
"Unless all those things happen, this bill will not move forward -- and it hasn't happened yet," he said.
Dayton again said that he wanted a "people's stadium", and that he and the Senate and House authors of proposed stadium legislation met Friday and were in agreement on capping the state's contribution at $300 million.
"That's absolutely the limit," the governor said. Dayton has said that any state roadwork near Arden Hills would have to be deducted from the $300 million, and state transportation officials said that road improvements necessary for the stadium would be roughly $175 million.
Vikings officials have disputed the figure and Lester Bagley, the Vikings vice president for stadium development and public affairs, said Thursday the figure "doesn't pass the smell test."
With 10 days left before the Legislature is scheduled to adjourn, Dayton also said that passing legislation so that work could be started on a new Vikings stadium was "far less preferable [but] it might be more preferable than no bill." He said however that passing stadium legislation without the details being resolved -- such as the road improvements -- might be giving the project a "blank check."
"I don't think they should be asked to" do that, Dayton said of the Legislature.
Read our comment standards
StarTribune.com welcomes and encourages readers to comment and engage in substantive, mutually respectful exchanges over news topics. Commenters must follow our Terms of Use.
- Keep it civil and stay on topic.
- No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks.
- Comments with web links are not permitted.
- Comments that violate the above will be removed. Repeat violators may lose their commenting privileges on StarTribune.com.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
More from Star Tribune
More From Hot Dish Politics
Sen. Franken gets a Trump chia, Klobuchar gets a moose mug in Senate gift exchange
Franken's Senate Santa gift exchange had 59 senators participating in exchanging gifts -- in a mostly bipartisan fashion.
Two recounts confirm wins for Republicans elected to Minnesota Senate
After recount in St. Cloud-area Senate seat, Republican Jerry Relph will join fellow Republicans in Minnesota Senate next year.
If Rep. Ellison steps down, a Minneapolis special election next year
If Rep. Ellison steps down, a Minneapolis special election next year
State Sen. Scott Dibble would run if Ellison steps down to serve as DNC chair
U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison, who is vying to be the next DNC chairman, said he would step down from his congressional seat if he's elected to the post, leaving an opening.
Dayton, legislative leaders say they are close on possible special session deal
A special session agenda would include tax cuts, a public works bill and financial assistance for some Minnesotans facing skyrocketing health insurance premiums.


text:
Cart Details Should Go Here
Nixon Mens Watch Ranger Chrono Sport 44mm$ 350.00
Product Details
Style Number : A9581258
Manufacturer : Nixon
Rugged construction, stainless steel band, and a dual eye chronograph will keep you on time no matter how far from the trail you stray.
FIELD INSTRUMENT DESIGNED: Rugged design for an outdoor lifestyle, detailed in a contemporary appearance.
CHRONO AND DATE: 5-hand chronograph, 24-hour and 30-minute subdials, countdown timer and date window at 6 o'clock.
DETAILED: Concave dial ring, rotational stainless steel bezel and second hand that serves as chronograph.
SPORT STYLE: Injection molded silicone band with patented locking looper and solid stainless steel buckle closure.


text:
Young boys are disappearing without a trace in Phoenix, Arizona! Half Asian, half Celtic, Psychic Detective Aurelia Hiyakawa is
?A superior thriller?(Oakland Press) from the #1 New York Times bestselling author?now in trade paperback for the
Forensic expert Lincoln Rhyme and his protégée Amelia Sachs are called in to work the high-profile investigation of a killer who
Once Mickey Magruder was a cop with a wild streak. And Kinsey Millhone was a younger cop who adored and married him. Then Mickey w
Called "one of the most original talents to emerge in the '90s" by Kirkus Reviews, award-winning author Laurie R. King deli
Easy Rawlins, L.A.'s most reluctant detective, comes home one day to find Easter, the daughter of his friend Chrismas Black, left
Herbalist China Bayles must solve a mother of a murder in this mystery from New York Times bestselling author Susan Witt
A homicide cop, Denzel Washington, hunts a satanic force that shifts from one human host to another in this taut, terrific superna
Dan Brown's international bestseller comes alive in the film THE DA VINCI CODE, directed by Ron Howard with a screenplay by Akiva
He takes his victims' lives and leaves behind mysterious pieces of a bizarre puzzle. And the only person who may be able to make s
Three friends who grew up in working-class Boston drift apart after a terrible tragedy. Years later, brutal events reconnect them.
GONE GIRL -- directed by David Fincher and based upon the global bestseller by Gillian Flynn -- unearths the secrets at the heart


text:
Is Anu Design incorrect or missing key business information? Update your Hotfrog listing today.
Contact details
Are these details correct?
Hotfrog Ireland provides information regarding Anu Design in Tara Meath. Anu Design is located at Collierstown, Tara Meath and provides advertising and marketing services. Contact them on (046) 902 6043.
Is Anu Design in Collierstown, Tara Meath your business? Claim your listing and attract more leads by adding more content, photos and other business details.
We have more advertising and marketing services in Tara Meath available on Hotfrog Ireland. You can update your search for Tara advertising and marketing by location, keyword or service options.
Ross Tara Meath
Rathfeigh House, Rathfeigh, Tara Tara Meath
Bramblewood house Tara Meath
Tara Meath
Small Business Hub
Sharing tips, ideas and advice to help grow your small business.
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
Score +183
Deal DetailsPromoted 10-18-2016 by qwikwit at 01:13 PM View Original Post
- Log in to your Discover Account
- Go to the Rewards Tab
- Click Discover Deals
- Enter Kohl's in the search field (Do not choose "Kohl's online", choose "Kohl's")
- Find the $10 off $30 offer and click "View Deal" (availability may vary)
- Note the barcode and 4-digit pin
- Go to Kohl's.com
- Add merchandise to cart
- Proceed to checkout
- Click on the "Kohl's Cash and Promos" field to enter the barcode and 4-digit pin for $10 off (will apply to your total as Kohl's Cash)
Editor's Notes & Price Research
If you do not yet have a Discover Card, CompareCards.com is a tool that can help you make a decision. A Kohl's Card application approval generally takes less than a minute. Some mobile devices are limited to 2 codes or less. If you cannot enter more than 2 codes, you need to switch to a PC. -qwikwit
Original Post
1. Discover Card Holders log into Discover acct.
2. Go to Rewards Tab
3. Click Discover Deals
4. Enter Kohls in search field (Do not choose "Kohls online", choose "Kohls")
5. Find $10 off $30 offer and click "View Deal" (eligibility may vary)
5. Note the barcode and 4 digit pin
6. Go to Kohls.com
7. Add merchandise to cart
8. Proceed to checkout
9. Enter barcode and pin for $10 off retrieved at Discover (will apply to your total as Kohl's Cash)
(Copied the above steps from last month deal. Thanks skyhorse)
Community Wiki
433 Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
MULTIPLE $10 Restaurant.com certificates (no expiration)
1X Xbox 360 code for Max: Curse of the Brotherhood game download
2X 2-day Xbox Live Gold trial code
3X Music download reward code for www.prizelabs.c
1X $5 Darden restaurants eGift Card (usable at Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Bahama Breeze, Seasons 52, Longhorn Steakhouse, or any other Darden restaurant)
1X $0.99 Target eGift Card
EXAMPLE TRADE: 5 $10 Restaurant.com certificate + 2 2-day Xbox Live Gold trial codes FOR $10 off $30 Kohl's coupon from Discover
Just come up with any combination offer via PM and I will consider it.