Right to counsel
While a state may have many statutes, court decisions, or court rules governing appointment of counsel for a particular subject area, a "Key Development" is a statute/decision/rule that prevails over the others (example: a state high court decision finding a categorical right to counsel in guardianships cases takes precedence over a statute saying appointment in guardianship cases is discretionary).
Legislation, Incarceration for Fees/Fines (incomplete)
In civil contempt proceedings not handled in family court, the court must "inform the offender that he or she has the right to the assistance of counsel," and the statute states that the court has the discretion to appoint counsel if the offender is financially unable to do so. N.Y. Jud. Law § 770. While this sounds discretionary, one court has said that § Section 770 "require[s] the court to make a choice once indigency is found: either retain the power to punish the offender with a term of imprisonment by assigning counsel, or surrender that power by proceeding without assignment of counsel." Holmes v. Holmes, 454 N.Y.S.2d 22, 23 (App. Div. 1982) (remanding order of contempt so that court could make finding of indigency on issue of appointment of counsel); see also Clemens v. Clemens, 817 N.Y.S.2d 87, 88 (App. Div. 2006) (instructing the appointment of counsel under section 770 for a "defendant, appearing pro se, [who] asked for the assistance of assigned counsel on the ground that he was unemployed and had no income or assets").5
If "yes", the established right to counsel or discretionary appointment of counsel is limited in some way, including any of: the only authority is a lower/intermediate court decision or a city council, not a high court or state legislature; there has been a subsequent case that has cast doubt; a statute is ambiguous; or the right or discretionary appointment is not for all types of individuals or proceedings within that category.
Appointment of Counsel: categorical Qualified: yes