WYOMING COURT RULES

94 factor for court to consider in its disposition of petition. Kittles v. Rocky Mt. Recovery, Inc., 1 P.3d 1220, 2000 Wyo. LEXIS 77 (Wyo. 2000). State prisoner’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) mo- tion was properly denied because the record made clear that his § 2254 petition was not timely filed under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244(d) in that the district court properly included the entire time from the filing of the state postconviction motion to the eventual denial of certiorari of his conviction for bribery under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-5-102(a). An additional 45-days of statu- tory tolling was not required because the pris- oner’s appeal of the denial of postconviction relief was not the procedurally proper manner to seek review pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-14-107 and Wyo. R. App. P. 13.01(a). Stan- ton v. Wyoming AG, 401 Fed. Appx. 313, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 21199 (10th Cir. Wyo. 2010), cert. denied, 563 U.S. 910, 131 S. Ct. 1798, 179 L. Ed. 2d 666, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 2423 (U.S. 2011). Appeal notice treatable as writ of certio- rari. — There is no inhibition in the court rules, the state constitution or any legislative mandate that precludes the Supreme Court from, on its own motion, considering a notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari and proceeding with review on that basis. When- ever the court determines that review by cer- tiorari is in the best interest of the state, or its citizens, it may be invoked. Alexander v. United States, 803 P.2d 61 (Wyo. 1990). Certiorari not granted if alternative remedy available. — Review pursuant to cer- tiorari is never granted lightly, especially if an adequate alternative remedy is available. Alex- ander v. United States, 803 P.2d 61 (Wyo. 1990).