The bald assertion by appellant, convicted in 1928, that he was not advised as to his constitutional rights, first advanced more than eighteen years after his conviction, when the stenographic transcripts of the proceedings upon his arraignment and sentence were no longer available, is insufficient to rebut the presumption of regularity attending such judgment, particularly in view of the proof submitted that it was the invariable custom of the County Judge then presiding...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.