Kernrechtsfrage
Whether the constitutional complaint was admissible after non-payment of the cost advance.
Extrahierter Entscheid
The complaint was not admitted because the complainant did not pay the cost advance or provide proof of timely payment within the final non-extendable deadline.
Extrahierte Begründung
After a warning under Art. 62(3) BGG and service deemed completed under Art. 44(2) BGG, the failure to comply with the advance-payment requirement led to non-entry under Art. 117 in conjunction with Art. 108(1)(a) BGG.