IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 40926

BRENT WILLIAMS, ) 2014 Unpublished Opinion No.351

)

Petitioner-Appellant, ) Filed: f,'ebruary 6,2014

)

v, ) Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

)

STATE OF IDAHO, ) THIS IS AI\ TJI\PUBLISHED

) OPINION AI{D SHALL NOT Respondent. ) BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Seventh Judicial District, State of ldaho.

Bonneville County. Hon. Joel E. Tingey, District Judge.

Order summarily dismissing petition for post-conviction relief, affirmed.

Brent Williams, Boise, pro se appellant.

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attomey General; Nicole L. Schafer, Deputy

Attomey General, Boise, for respondent.

GRATTON, Judge

Brent Williams appeals from the district court's sumrnary dismissal of his petition for

post-conviction relief. We affirm.

I.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Williams pled guilty pusuant to plea agreements in two sepzrate cases and the district

court entered two judgments of conviction and sentences on January I 0, 201 1 . Williams did not

file direct appeals in either case. on February 28, 2013, williams filed a pro se petition for postconviction relief. The district court filed a notice of intent to dismiss Williams' petition because

it failed to present viable claims. The State filed a motion to dismiss asserting the petition was

filed outside the statute of limitations. Williams' objection to dismissal did not address the
timeliness of his petition. The court issued an order of dismissal for Williams' failure to file his

petition within the one-year statute of limitations.l Williams timely appeals.

IL

ANALYSIS

Our review ofthe district court's construction and application of the limitation statute is a

matter of free review. Kriebel v. State, 148 Idaho 188, 190,219 P3d 1204, 1206 (Ct. App.

2009). The statute of limitations for post-conviction actions provides that a petition for postconviction relief may be frled at any time within one year from the expiration of the time for

appeal, or from the determination of appeal, or from the determination of a proceeding following

an appeal, whichever is later. I.C. $ 19-4902(a). The appeal referenced in that section means the

appeal in the underlying criminal case. Gonzalez v. State,I39 Idaho 384,385,79 P.3d 743,744

(Ct. App. 2003). The failure to file a timely petition is a basis for dismissal of the petition.

Kriebel, 148 Idaho at 190, 219 P.3d at 1206.

The district court dismissed Williams' petition because it was not timely filed. Williams

argues his petition for post-conviction relief is not time-barred because his recent due diligence

led to the discovery of the legal argument that a grand jury indictrnent was required in his case.

A party waives an issue on appeal if either authority or argument is lacY,ing. State v. Zichko, 129

Idaho 259,263,923 P.2d 966,970 (1996). Williams offers neither authority nor argument to

support the notion that the statutory period is tolled because the petitioner later leams of a legal

argument (enoneous as it is). Williams also argues his innocence tolled the time requirement.

However, he has again failed to ofler authority or argument to support his contention. The

statutory period began forty-two days after his judgment of conviction was entered. Williams

has presented nothing to excuse his failure to timely file within the one-year period.

ilI.

CONCLUSION

Williams did not timely file his petition for post-conviction relief. Therefore, the order of

dismissal is affirmed.

Judge MELANSON CONCURS.

Judge LANSING CONCURS IN THE RESULT.

t The court also dismissed the petition based on Williams' failure to present meritorious

claims. However, on appeal, the State argues only the issue of timeliness.