See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 108 S.Ct. 2379, 101 L.Ed.2d 245 (1988). Meanwhile, the State argues in favor of applying New Jersey Court Rule l:5-6(b)(2), which would make the "properly filed” date when the clerk of the court marked the document “filed.” Because New Jersey law does not provide a clear answer and resolution of the issue has no impact on our final count of days tolled, we need not resolve this issue. 4 , The State raised this argument in its answer to Thompson’s habeas petition. 5 . The State also argues the pro se pleadings were proper because Thompson waived his right to counsel. We reject this argument for want of evidence that Thompson knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel. State v. Coon, 314 N.J.Super. 426, 715 A.2d 326, 330 (App.Div. 1998)
holding that one must voluntarily and intelligently waive the right to counsel holding that waiver of counsel may be valid absent an inquiry by the court where the surrounding facts and circumstances including the defendants background and conduct demonstrate that he actually understood his right to counsel and the difficulties of pro se representation and knowingly and intelligently waived his right internal quotation marks omitted holding that lower courts misunderstood the requirement for finding a valid waiver of the right to counsel where neither the trial court nor the arizona supreme court undertook to focus on whether edwards understood his right to counsel and intelligently and knowingly relinquished it holding that waiver of counsel during pcr review requires a judicial inquiry into whether defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel holding that in order for a waiver of counsel to be valid the trial court must ensure that the defendants waiver of his right to counsel is done knowingly and intelligently so that the record establishes that the defendants choice is made with eyes open