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).
Litigation, Civil Commitment
In True v. State Department of Health and Welfare, the plaintiff, who was challenging the constitutionality of her rehospitalization, claimed that her due process rights were violated during the hospitalization hearing. 645 P.2d 891 (Idaho 1982). The Supreme Court of Idaho ruled in her favor, requiring more due process safeguards prior to her re-hospitalization, and specifically held that at the rehospitalization hearing, "the patient is to be afforded the right to counsel." Id. at 903.
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.
categorical
no
