Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103 (2026)

Claims barred; applicability of act.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A claim under this act is procedurally barred and no
court has jurisdiction to decide the claim if the claim:

          (i) Could have been raised but was not raised in a
direct appeal from the proceeding which resulted in the
petitioner's conviction;
          (ii) Was not raised in the original or an amendment
to the original petition under this act; or

          (iii) Was decided on its merits or on procedural
grounds in any previous proceeding which has become final.

     (b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(i) of this section, a
court may hear a petition based on any of the following:

          (i) The petitioner sets forth facts supported by
affidavits or other credible evidence which was not known or
reasonably available to him at the time of a direct appeal;

          (ii) The court finds from a review of the trial and
appellate records that the petitioner's appellate counsel
provided constitutionally ineffective assistance by failing to
assert a claim that was likely to result in a reversal of the
petitioner's conviction or sentence on his direct appeal. This
finding may be reviewed by the supreme court together with any
further action of the district court taken on the petition; or

          (iii) The petitioner was represented by the same
attorney in the trial and appellate courts.

     (c) This act does not apply to claims of error or denial
of rights in any proceeding:

           (i)   For the revocation of probation or parole;

          (ii) Provided by statute or court rule for new trial,
sentence reduction, sentence correction or other post-verdict
motion.

     (d) No petition under this act shall be allowed if filed
more than five (5) years after the judgment of conviction was
entered.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 63 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1985–2022 · leading case: Harlow v. State, 2005 WY 12 (Wyo. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Harlow v. State, 2005 WY 12 (Wyo. 2005). · cites it 16× “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-14-103 (Lexis Nexis 2003).”

Swazo v. State, 800 P.2d 1152 (Wyo. 1990). · cites it 15× “[7] So do I and I understand that constitutional right to inform the power of our post-conviction statute, W.S. 7-14-103, but this court is skeptical that such a right extends to require review of denied petitions for post-conviction relief.”

Keats v. State, 2005 WY 81 (Wyo. 2005). · cites it 5× “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-14-103 (a) (LexisNexis 2005) states: (a) A claim under this act is procedurally barred and no court has the jurisdiction to decide the claim if the claim: (i) Could have been raised but was not raised in a direct appeal from the proceeding which resulted in…”

Bibbins v. State, 741 P.2d 115 (Wyo. 1987). · cites it 8× “Post-conviction relief proceedings are not available for every irregularity that may have taken place in the trial court, but are limited to cases involving a substantial denial of an accused's rights under the Constitution of the United States or of the State of Wyoming or both.”

Parkhurst v. State, 443 P.3d 834 (Wyo. 2019). · cites it 4× “Parkhurst alleged that his trial counsel, Wyatt Skaggs, was ineffective because: (1) he was operating under a conflict of interest after Mr.”

Murray v. State, 776 P.2d 206 (Wyo. 1989). · cites it 4× “Moreover, W.S. 7-14-103 provides that any claim of substantial denial of constitutional rights not raised in the original or an amended petition is waived.”

Schuler v. State, 771 P.2d 1217 (Wyo. 1989). · cites it 8× “Obviously, the constitutionality and the structural validity of the post-conviction-relief processes, as well as its preclusive effect under W.S. 7-14-103 [6] as then existed, or W.S.”

Smizer v. State, 835 P.2d 334 (Wyo. 1992). · cites it 8× “[1] Smizer argues that his claim of ineffective assistance of his appellate counsel, for failure to raise the issue of ineffective assistance of his trial counsel, requires that an evidentiary hearing be held to determine whether his trial counsel rendered effective…”

Alberts v. State, 745 P.2d 898 (Wyo. 1987). · cites it 4× “[6] Section 7-14-103, W.S. 1977, provides: "Any claim of substantial denial of constitutional rights not raised in the original or amended petition is waived.”

Neidlinger v. State, 2010 WY 54 (Wyo. 2010). · cites it 4× “35(a) & (b) (allowing a court to correct an illegal sentence at any time and reduce a sentence within specific time limits); Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-14-103 (LexisNexis 2009) (allowing a court to consider violations of constitutional rights if challenged within five years of the…”

Aden v. State, 761 P.2d 88 (Wyo. 1988). · cites it 8× “7-14-101(b); "(iii) Is not barred under W.S. 7-14-103; and "(iv) Raises issues which cannot reasonably be presented by the petitioner without the assistance of an attorney.”

Nixon v. State, 2002 WY 118 (Wyo. 2002). · cites it 2× “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-14-103 (LexisNexis 2001).”

Show all 63 citing cases →

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(a) — 2 cases

Hauck v. State, 162 P.3d 512 (Wyo. 2007).

Skinner v. Abbott, 141 F. App'x 727 (10th Cir. 2005).

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(a)(i) — 7 cases

Swazo v. State, 800 P.2d 1152 (Wyo. 1990). “[7] So do I and I understand that constitutional right to inform the power of our post-conviction statute, W.S. 7-14-103, but this court is skeptical that such a right extends to require review of denied petitions for post-conviction relief.”

Hicks v. State, 409 P.3d 1256 (Wyo. 2018).

Keats v. State, 2005 WY 81 (Wyo. 2005). “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-14-103 (a) (LexisNexis 2005) states: (a) A claim under this act is procedurally barred and no court has the jurisdiction to decide the claim if the claim: (i) Could have been raised but was not raised in a direct appeal from the proceeding which resulted in…”

Swazo v. Shillinger, 932 F. Supp. 1350 (D. Wyo. 1996).

Leslie v. Abbott, 117 F. App'x 72 (10th Cir. 2004).

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(a)(ii) — 1 case

Swazo v. Shillinger, 932 F. Supp. 1350 (D. Wyo. 1996).

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(a)(iii) — 1 case

Schreibvogel v. State, 269 P.3d 1098 (Wyo. 2012).

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(b) — 1 case

Swazo v. Shillinger, 932 F. Supp. 1350 (D. Wyo. 1996).

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(b)(ii) — 1 case

Benjamin v. Meyer, 568 F. App'x 603 (10th Cir. 2014).

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-103(d) — 4 cases

Teniente v. Wyoming Attorney Gen., 412 F. App'x 96 (10th Cir. 2011).

Weldon v. Wyoming Dep't of Corr. State Penitentiary Warden, 963 F. Supp. 1098 (D. Wyo. 1997).

Capshaw v. Abbott, 197 F. App'x 758 (10th Cir. 2006).

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.