本页的正文尚未翻译，因此以下内容以英文显示。上方的摘要、标签和安全信息已翻译。
The right to a lawyer paid for by the state when you cannot afford one is among the most important protections in American criminal procedure, and it is frequently misunderstood as something that only kicks in at a trial. Two Supreme Court cases established the framework: Gideon v. Wainwright for adults facing serious charges, and In re Gault for young people in juvenile delinquency proceedings.
Where the right comes from
Gideon v. Wainwright held that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel applies to defendants in state courts, requiring that counsel be provided to those who cannot afford one. In re Gault extended core due process protections to juvenile delinquency proceedings, including notice of the charges, the right to counsel, the privilege against self-incrimination, and the right to confront witnesses.
Gault matters enormously here. Before it, juvenile proceedings were treated as informal and protective rather than adversarial, which in practice meant young people faced consequences with fewer protections than adults charged with the same conduct. Gault said that a proceeding that can result in confinement requires the protections of due process regardless of what it is called.
How appointment actually works
Eligibility is generally based on financial need, assessed by the court using a financial affidavit or screening. For a minor, the assessment commonly looks at the parents' financial circumstances rather than the young person's own, which occasionally produces a hard case: a family with income on paper who will not pay for a lawyer.
Depending on the jurisdiction, appointed counsel may be a public defender's office, a court-appointed private attorney paid by the state, or a contract system. Some jurisdictions charge a fee or seek partial repayment. Asking about that at the start is reasonable, and it should never be the reason someone declines a lawyer without first saying they cannot pay.
Ask early, and do not waive without advice
The moment to ask is the first moment there is any process at all — including at the intake stage described in our juvenile intake article, where diversion decisions get made before anyone sees a courtroom. Waiting until a hearing means the most consequential informal decisions may already have been taken.
Waiving the right to counsel is possible in many places but is a serious step, and some states restrict when a minor may do it or require consultation with a lawyer first. A young person should not waive counsel because a proceeding sounds informal, because an adult suggests it will be faster, or because they believe explaining things themselves will help. Ask for a lawyer, and say you cannot afford one — that sentence is what starts the appointment process.
请记住
- Gideon v. Wainwright requires appointed counsel for those who cannot afford one; In re Gault extended core due process rights to juvenile proceedings.
- Eligibility is based on financial need, and for a minor the assessment commonly looks at the parents' finances.
- Ask at the very first stage, including intake — that's where diversion decisions get made.
- Don't waive counsel because a proceeding sounds informal; some states restrict when a minor may waive at all.
资料来源
本文提供的是一般教育信息，不是针对个人的法律意见。KidsKnowRights 不是律师事务所，阅读本文不会建立律师与当事人的关系。法律因州、年龄和具体情况而异，也会随时间变化。如需针对真实情况的建议，请咨询持照律师或法律援助机构。