Right to counsel

Wisconsin , Litigation , Civil Commitment

In State ex rel. Memmel v. Mundy, 249 N.W.2d 573, 576 (Wis. 1977), the court stated that “At least as to indigents involved in such proceedings, it is a constitutional requirement that legal representation be provided for the person whose commitment is sought”, and relied on similar rulings from federal courts. The fact that the Memmel court relied entirely on federal decisions makes it likely that this was a decision based on the Fourteenth Amendment, as opposed to the state constitution’s due process clause.

Appointment of Counsel: Yes
Qualified: No
? 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.