Opinion ID: 2053567
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Motion for Permission to File a Delayed Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Text: Following the announcement of the jury's verdict in this case, Arne left the courtroom in anger. He rushed through the front door of the courthouse, pushing the door open with some energy. As a consequence, the door slammed shut with force, breaking the glass in the door. The trial court held Arne in contempt for breaking the glass in the courthouse door. Arne claims the record lacks substantial evidence to support a finding that his conduct constituted contempt. To challenge an order to punish for contempt, the complainant must file a petition for writ of certiorari within thirty days from the contempt finding. See Iowa Code § 665.11 (No appeal lies from an order to punish for a contempt.); Iowa R.App. P. 301; Iowa R. Civ. P. 307(c) (1998) (formerly Iowa R. Civ. P. 319). The reviewing court may grant an extension of time to file the petition if a motion for extension of time is filed within ninety days of the contempt finding, upon a showing that failure to file the petition within the time provided was due to a failure of the tribunal, board or officer to notify the petitioner of the action complained of. Iowa R. Civ. P. 307(c). The trial court found Arne in contempt on October 10, 1996. Arne filed his delayed petition for writ of certiorari on June 11, 1997, more than ninety days after the contempt finding. Ordinarily, a failure to petition within the specified time limits requires dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. State v. Anderson, 308 N.W.2d 42, 46 (Iowa 1981) (interpreting direct appeal time constraints). Arne seeks to avoid dismissal by claiming that the earlier appeal of his criminal convictions encompassed the contempt order. He then asks that we treat the improvidently-taken contempt appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. Iowa Rule of Appellate Procedure 304 states: If any case is brought by appeal, certiorari, or discretionary review, and the appellate court is of the opinion that another of these remedies was the proper one, the case shall not be dismissed, but shall proceed as though the proper form of review had been sought. Any one of the foregoing remedies may under this rule be treated by the appellate court as the one it deems appropriate. Nothing in this rule shall operate to extend the time within which an appeal may be taken. (Emphasis added.) The emphasized language, as applied to this case, means that any appeal of the order of contempt must be filed within the time constraints applicable to petitions for writ of certiorari. As noted above, such petitions must be filed within thirty days of the order, unless extended upon application filed within ninety days of the order. Here, Arne's notice of appeal was filed on November 18, 1996, more than thirty days after the order of contempt, but within ninety days of the order. Even if we construed the notice of appeal as a motion for extension of time under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 307(c), Arne has not shown, nor even claimed, that his failure to file the petition within the time provided was due to a failure of the tribunal, board or officer to notify [him] of the action complained of. Iowa R. Civ. P. 307(c). Consequently, Arne has not met the requirement of rule 307(c) for an extension of time to file a petition for writ of certiorari. As a result, his notice of appeal was not timely filed. Therefore, even if we consider his notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari under rule 304, his right to appellate review has not been preserved because his request for review came too late.