WHETHER DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE TOLLING COULD BE PROPERLY INVOKED AND ULTIMATELY APPLIED BY DISTRICT COURT TO RENDER AN OTHERWISE UNTIMELY CLAIM THAT EXISTED AT THE TIME OF PETITIONER'S FILING OF HIS FIRST 2254 PETITION BUT NOT RAISED DUE TO HIS TRIAL LAWYER'S BALD-FACED LIE TIMELY BY MAKING IT RELATE-BACK TO TIMELY FILE FIRST PETITION EVEN THOUGH IT WAS BEING RAISED IN A TECHNICALLY SUCCESSIVE PETITION?

Whether doctrine of equitable tolling could be properly invoked and ultimately applied by district court to render an otherwise untimely claim that existed at the time of petitioner's filing of his first 2254 petition but not raised due to his trial lawyer's bald-faced lie timely by making it relate-back to timely filed first petition even though it was being raised in a technically successive petition