Rhode Island General Laws
R.I. Gen. Laws § 10-9.1-9 (2026)
Review
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
An aggrieved party seeking review of a final judgment entered in a proceeding brought under this chapter shall do so by filing a petition for writ of certiorari in accordance with the supreme court rules of appellate procedure within sixty (60) days of the entry of the final judgment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: Pedro Reyes v. State of Rhode Island, 141 A.3d 644 (R.I. 2016).
Pedro Reyes v. State of Rhode Island, 141 A.3d 644 (R.I. 2016). “1-6(c) 10 After Reyes appealed but before oral argument in this case, the General Assembly amended § 10-9.1-9 to require a party aggrieved by a final judgment entered in a postconviction-relief proceeding to seek review by filing a petition for writ of certiorari with this Court.”
Young v. State, 877 A.2d 625 (R.I. 2005). “Young came before this Court to contest the dismissal of his application, pursuant to G.L.1956 § 10-9.1-9, which provides that “[a] final judgment entered in a proceeding brought under this chapter shall be appealable to the supreme court * * On January 8, 2004, pursuant to…”
State v. Duggan, 414 A.2d 788 (R.I. 1980). “General Laws 1956 (1969 Reenactment) § 10-9.1-9 provides: “A final judgment entered * * shall be appealable to the supreme court in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as a final judgment in a civil action.”
Harold Drew v. State of Rhode Island, 198 A.3d 528 (R.I. 2019). “We note that G.L. 1956 § 10-9.1-9 was amended in June 2015, and now requires an aggrieved party to file a petition for certiorari to review the denial of an application for postconviction relief.”
State v. Frederick Gibson Frederick Gibson v. State of Rhode Island, 182 A.3d 540 (R.I. 2018). “Gibson's challenge to the denial of postconviction relief comes to us on appeal, not certiorari, because he filed his notice of appeal prior to the 2015 amendment to G.L. 1956 § 10-9.1-9 requiring an applicant seeking review of a final judgment regarding postconviction relief to…”
Carpenter v. State, 796 A.2d 1071 (R.I. 2002). “Pursuant to G.L.1956 § 10-9.1-9, “[a] final judgment entered in a[PCR] proceeding brought under this chapter shall be appealable to the [Sjupreme [Cjourt in the same manner and subject to the same requirements as a final judgment in a civil action.”
State v. Feng, 421 A.2d 1258 (R.I. 1980). “1 — 1 through § 10-9.1-9, as enacted by P.L. 1974, ch. 220, § 3.”
Ferrell v. Wall, 889 A.2d 177 (R.I. 2005). “” The state filed a timely appeal on February 3, 2005, pursuant to § 10-9.1-9. In addition, the state petitioned this Court for a stay pending the result of its appeal on February 10, 2005.”
Tempest v. State, 141 A.3d 677 (R.I. 2016). “In 2015, the General Assembly amended § 10-9.1-9, as amended by P.L. 2015, ch. 92, § ’1, such that an aggrieved party may seek review of ari order denying postconviction relief "by filing a petition for writ of certiorari in accordance with the [Sjupreme [Cjourt [Rjules of…”
Miguel v. State, 774 A.2d 19 (R.I. 2001). “1 The defendant came before this Court to contest the dismissal of his application, pursuant to § 10-9.1-9, which provides that “[a] final judgment entered in a proceeding brought under this chapter shall be appealable to the Supreme Court.”
State v. Gibbons, 418 A.2d 830 (R.I. 1980). “1-1 through § 10-9.1-9, as enacted by P.L.1974, ch. 220, § 3, so that if there any review in this court, we shall have the benefit of a full record and a decision of the Superior Court on that specific claim.”
Leonard Jefferson v. State of Rhode Island, 184 A.3d 1094 (R.I. 2018). “1 The General Assembly has amended G.L. 1956 § 10-9.1-9 so as to require a party aggrieved by a final judgment entered in a postconviction relief proceeding to seek review by filing a petition for a writ of certiorari with this Court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.