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).
Litigation, Civil Forfeiture
The Alaska Supreme Court held that a court can appoint counsel in a civil forfeiture proceeding where there are no criminal charges pending or where the forfeiture proceeding has not been stayed, in order to protect the claimant's privilege against self-incrimination. It did not indicate the source of authority for such appointments.
Cite: Resek v. State, 706 P.2d 288, 289 (Alaska 1985)
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.
discretionary
no
