Should Federal Courts apply the prison mailbox rule announced in Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) to state post conviction pleadings to commence tolling of the AEDPA's one year statute of limitations governed by 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(2)?

QUESTION PRESENTED | Introduction : . Mr. Castle filed for post collateral relief based on his finding of an uncommunicated written guilty plea offer from the Commonwealth. The start of his federal habeas corpus statute of limitations is governed by 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(1)(D), the date on which the factual predicate of the claim was discovered. The only point of contention in the calculation of the timeliness of Mr. Castle's habeas petition is the date on which his post collateral motion is considered to be properly filed in the state trial court. Mr. Castle's state post collateral motion was handed to prison: officials to be placed into the institution's legal mail system on July 9, 2020. It was not until July 27, 2020, eighteen (18) days later that his motion was entered into the Clerk's file. The answer to the following question will determine if Mr. Castle's habeas petition is considered timely filed or whether the statute of limitations has run out. 4 . Question For purposes of establishing consistency in determinations of “properly filed” as required by 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(2), should Federal Courts apply the prison mailbox rule announced in Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) to state post conviction pleadings to commence tolling of the AEDPA's one year statute of limitations governed by 28 U.S.C. g224a(aycy? i) i .