Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-106 (2026)

Evidence received by court; orders entered upon

✓ current as of May 2026

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

favorable finding; contents of final judgment or order.

     (a) The court may, if it determines it to be necessary,
receive proof by affidavits, deposition, oral testimony or other
evidence and may order the petitioner brought before the court
for the hearing.

     (b) If the court finds in favor of the petitioner, it
shall enter an appropriate order with respect to the judgment or
sentence in the former proceedings and any supplementary orders
as to rearraignment, retrial, custody, bail or discharge as may
be necessary and proper.

     (c) The final judgment or order on a petition under this
act shall state the basis for the court's decision and may
contain findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2022 · leading case: Kallas v. State, 776 P.2d 198 (Wyo. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kallas v. State, 776 P.2d 198 (Wyo. 1989). · cites it 4× “[2] Since the constituent of discretion is thoughtful analysis and informed decision, I analyze this case by looking at the substantive issue and then determine whether abuse of discretion is presented in denial of the evidentiary hearing.”

State Ex Rel. Hopkinson v. Dist. Court, Teton Cnty., 696 P.2d 54 (Wyo. 1985). · cites it 2× “” Section 7-14-106, W.S. We see no need to further explore the nuances of habeas corpus when the district court had before it a petition for post-conviction relief which raised any question now before us that could be considered in a habeas corpus proceeding, and it was…”

Bibbins v. State, 696 P.2d 1300 (Wyo. 1985). · cites it 4× “* * *" Section 7-14-106, W.S. 1977, provides: "The court may receive proof by affidavits, deposition, oral testimony, or other evidence.”

Pote v. State, 733 P.2d 1018 (Wyo. 1987). · cites it 2× “* * *" § 7-14-106, W.S. 1977. The post-conviction procedure set forth in the statutes does not require a formal hearing nor does it require that the petitioner be brought before the court.”

Smizer v. State, 835 P.2d 334 (Wyo. 1992). · cites it 4× “See also Wyo.Stat. § 7-14-106(a) (Supp.1991). However, in rare cases such as this one, an evidentiary hearing is necessary when the court cannot adequately review the issues by relying upon the record alone.”

Matlack v. State, 695 P.2d 635 (Wyo. 1985). · cites it 2× “Section 7-14-106, W.S. 1977, provides: “The court may receive proof by affidavits, deposition, oral testimony, or other evidence.”

Paul Michael Harnetty v. The State of Wyoming, 2022 WY 68 (Wyo. 2022). · cites it 2× “56 as a procedural trap to preclude full development of the evidentiary basis necessary to fairly rule on a substantiated post- conviction claim.”

Coletti v. State, 801 P.2d 1035 (Wyo. 1990). · cites it 2× “W.S. 7-14-106(c) provides that “[t]he final judgment or order on a petition under this act shall state the basis for the court's decision and may contain findings of fact and conclusions of law.”

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-106(a) — 2 cases

Kallas v. State, 776 P.2d 198 (Wyo. 1989). “[2] Since the constituent of discretion is thoughtful analysis and informed decision, I analyze this case by looking at the substantive issue and then determine whether abuse of discretion is presented in denial of the evidentiary hearing.”

Smizer v. State, 835 P.2d 334 (Wyo. 1992). “See also Wyo.Stat. § 7-14-106(a) (Supp.1991). However, in rare cases such as this one, an evidentiary hearing is necessary when the court cannot adequately review the issues by relying upon the record alone.”

— Wyo. Stat. § 7-14-106(c) — 1 case

Coletti v. State, 801 P.2d 1035 (Wyo. 1990). “W.S. 7-14-106(c) provides that “[t]he final judgment or order on a petition under this act shall state the basis for the court's decision and may contain findings of fact and conclusions of law.”

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.