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, Termination of Parental Rights (State) - Children
While Ariz. Stat. § 8-221(B) specifies that the court shall appoint an attorney for the juvenile, § 8-221(A) states, "In all proceedings involving . . . dependency or termination of parental rights that are conducted pursuant to this title and that may result in detention, a juvenile has the right to be represented by counsel" (emphasis added). As a termination of parental rights case will never result in detention for the juvenile, it is unclear what the legislature intended with this provision. Additionally, § 8-221(I) specifies, "In all juvenile court proceedings in which the dependency petition includes an allegation that the juvenile is abused or neglected, the court shall appoint a guardian ad litem to protect the juvenile's best interests. This guardian may be an attorney or a court appointed special advocate." It is hard to know how to reconcile these conflicting provisions.
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: yes