to review such judgment or order on motion, or on appeal, writ of error or supersedeas, or in some manner other than upon eertiorari[.]” We have long interpret ed this language to mean that a writ of certiorari cannot be used when a statute provides for another means of judicial review. We articulated this point in syllabus point 4, in part, of North v. West Virginia Board of Regents, 160 W.Va. 248, 233 S.E.2d 411 (1977), wherein we said “[a] writ of cer-tiorari will lie from an inferior tribunal, acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity, where substantial rights are alleged to have been violated and where there is no other statutory right of review given.’’ (Emphasis added). See also Rawl Sales & Processing Co. v. County Com’n, 191 W.Va. 127, 131, 443 S.E.2d 595, 599 (1994) (<HOLDING>); In re Adoption of Johnson, 144 W.Va. 625,
holding it is settled that the supreme court may consider questions raised on the first appeal after which the court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari as well as those that were before the court of appeals upon the second appeal after which the court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari internal quotation marks omitted holding that an argument not made to the circuit court cannot be raised on appeal holding that district courts of appeal have jurisdiction to review by common law certiorari decision of circuit court upholding county court conviction obtained in violation of constitution holding that writ of certiorari could not be used to appeal property tax assessment decision to circuit court because specific statute provided for appeal holding that the defendant did not have an appeal as of right or grounds for a commonlaw writ of certiorari to review a trial courts denial of sentencing credits