Discretionary appointment of 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).
Court Rule or Initiative, Abuse/Neglect/Dependency - Children
In 2019 the Supreme Court of Ohio amended Ohio Sup. R. 48.02 to address appointment of counsel for children in various situations:
(D)Separate appointments in abuse, neglect, dependency, unruly, and delinquency cases and cases of conflict.
(1) A court shall appoint a separate attorney to represent a child in abuse, neglect, dependency, unruly, and delinquency cases in which the wishes of the child differ from the recommendations of the guardian ad litem.
(2) If an attorney who has been appointed to serve as both guardian ad litem and attorney for the child or any other party believes that a conflict exists in the dual appointment, the attorney or party shall immediately notify the court in writing with notice to the parties or affected agencies and request a separate appointment of a guardian ad litem and attorney for the child. The court shall make such additional appointment or appointments or order or orders to remedy the conflict. The court may also make such appointment or appointments on its own motion.
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: discretionary Qualified: no