Key legal question
Whether the subsidiary constitutional appeal met the constitutional motivation requirements against the cantonal ruling on timeliness.
Extracted holding
No. The appellant did not invoke any constitutional right or show arbitrariness; he merely presented his own version of the facts.
Extracted reasoning
Under Art. 106(2) LTF, constitutional grievances must be expressly raised and substantiated. The submission was therefore manifestly insufficient, and the appellant's version was contradicted by the receipt signed on 14 October 2010.