Whether the Pennsylvania appellate court erred in dismissing the petitioner's appeal for untimely filing of notice of appeal

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED QUESTION I: | WHETHER THE PENNSYLVANIA APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN DISMISSING THE PETITIONER'S APPEAL FOR UNTIMELY FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL, BASED ON PETITIONER'S ADMITTED | CLERICAL ERROR OF MISDATING THE NOTICE OF APPEAL AS ONE | DAY LATE, AND THEREBY USING PETITIONER'S CLERICAL ERROR AS | A BASIS TO REJECT/NEGATE REASONABLY VERIFIABLE PROOF | PRESENTED THAT THE NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS "ACTUALLY" FILED | ON THE LAST DAY OF TIMELINESS, PURSUANT TO THE "PRISONER MAILBOX RULE", HOUSTON V. LACK AND IT'S PROGENY? QUESTION II: © WHETHER THE PENNSYLVANIA APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN DISMISSING PETITIONER'S APPEAL FOR UNTIMELY FILING : OF NOTICE OF APPEAL WITHOUT REMANDING FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON THE REASONABLY VERIFIABLE PROOF PRESENTED OF TIMELY FILING BY "PRISONER MAILBOX RULE", HOUSTON V. LACK AND ITS PROGENY?