Whether the decisions of the courts below ought to be summarily reversed and the case remanded to the court of appeals with instructions to remand the case to the district court with instructions to dispose of Nedd's 2254 petition as law and justice require, including conducting appropriate fact-finding procedures to determine whether Nedd qualifies for statutory tolling of the statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C 2254 (d)(2)

QUESTION PRESENTED Jowarski R. Nedd filed in the district court, below,. a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28. U.S.C. 2254. Despite the facts alleged in Nedd's 2254 Petition and the proofs he presented in support of his Reply to the Respondent's statute of limitation defense showing that Nedd fully complied with the filing requirements set forth in Va. Code~8.01-654(B)(1) and .8.01-655, and Va.Sup.Ct.R 3A:25, the district court granted the State's Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss on statute of limitation grounds, based on its conclusion that Nedd failed to demonstrate that he ever properly filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the state court. In reaching that conclusion, the district court relied upon its arbitrary and baseless finding _ that the Circuit Court of Accomack County noted that Nedd's State ! Petition for writ of Habeas Corpus had not been properly prepared Moreover, in determining that Nedd's 2254 Petition was barred by the statute of limitations, the district court ignored, and failed to address, Nedd's alternative argument for statutory tolling during the time his State Habeas Corpus Petition was pending in the State Circuit Court. . Did the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals err and abused | its discretion in exercising its Appellate Jurisdiction to deny and dismiss the Petitioner's cause of action remand to the U.S. District Court, without any subsequent proceedings or a . (ii) | Final Order, there from. This case thus presents the following , ¢question: | WHETHER THE DECISIONS OF THE COURTS BELOW OUGHT TO BE SUMMARILY REVERSED AND THE CASE REMANDED TO THE COURT OF APPEALS WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE DISTRICT COURT WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO DISPOSE OF NEDD"S 2254 PETITION : AS LAW AND JUSTICE. REQUIRE, INCLUDING CONDUCTING APPROPRAITE FACT-FINDING PROCEDURES TO DETERMINE WHETHER NEDD QUALIFIES FOR STATUTORY TOLLING OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS UNDER 28 U.S.C 2254 (d)(2). (iii) | | |