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, Paternity - Defendant/Respondent
in Reynolds v. Kimmons, 569 P.2d 799, 803 (Alaska 1977), the Alaska Supreme Court found a right to counsel for indigent defendants in paternity proceedings under the Alaska Constitution's due process clause where the plaintiff is represented by the state. The court relied on the quasi-civil nature of the proceedings, the potential criminal charges stemming from future nonsuppoort, and the importance of the establishment of the parent-child relationship.
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
yes
