Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 24 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Light v. State.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Light v. State Anchor | green | “the presumption of regularity is a judicial construct that requires a reviewing court, absent evidence of impropriety, to indulge every presumption in favor of the regularity of the proceedings and documents in the lower court.” | 8 |
| 2 | Light v. State | green | “absent evidence of impropriety,” | 7 |
| 3 | McCloud v. State | green | “must indulge every presumption in favor of the regularity of the proceedings and documents” | 5 |
| 4 | Jones v. State | green | “in the absence of evidence to the contrary, this court presumes the regularity of the trial court's judgment and records.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.