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, Abuse/Neglect/Dependency - Accused Parents
Indigent defendant parents have a right to counsel at a preliminary protective hearing to review the taking into temporary custody of a child from the home of the parent or guardian (Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 8-824(D)), at an initial dependency hearing for a child initiated upon petition by a third party (Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 8-843(B)), and at a proceeding for permanent guardianship of a child (Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 8-872(D)). They also have a statutory right to counsel for the remainder of the dependency proceedings. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 8- 221(B); Daniel Y. v. Arizona Dept. of Economic Sec., 77 P.3d 55, 58 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003),
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: no