Also known as: access-to-counsel · right to counsel
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional guarantee that an accused person may have the assistance of an attorney during critical stages of a criminal prosecution. The guarantee attaches upon the initiation of formal adversary proceedings and requires that counsel be present or that the accused validly waive the right before government agents may proceed with interrogation or identification procedures. Once invoked during custodial questioning the right bars police from reinitiating contact until counsel is provided or the suspect initiates further communication.
After his arrest for embezzlement Adrian Aguilar told detectives he wanted a lawyer before answering questions. The officers stopped and left the room. An hour later a different detective returned, repeated the warnings, and resumed questioning about the same offense while Aguilar remained in custody without counsel. The resulting statement is inadmissible because the right to counsel barred police from restarting interrogation.
After indictment Alice Atkins was taken to a police station lobby where a witness viewed her through glass flanked by officers. No attorney was present. The identification obtained at that showup must be suppressed because the right to counsel applies to post-charge corporeal identification procedures.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Detectives showed a witness a single photograph of Anthony Arnold two days after a robbery. No lawyer attended the display. The resulting identification is admissible because the right to counsel does not extend to photo identifications even after formal charges have been filed.
Police arrested Antonio Alvarado at his apartment and questioned him at the station about a burglary without first advising him of his rights. Alvarado made incriminating statements. Those statements are inadmissible because the right to counsel during custodial interrogation requires that warnings be given before questioning begins.
Alan Ackerman was charged with felony theft and could not afford an attorney. The trial court refused to appoint counsel and forced Ackerman to represent himself. The resulting conviction cannot stand because the right to counsel requires appointment of an attorney for an indigent defendant facing imprisonment.
Amber Alonzo received a grant of immunity and was ordered to testify before a grand jury about a conspiracy. She refused, claiming she needed counsel present. The court may compel her testimony because the right to counsel does not prevent the government from requiring immunized testimony once adequate protection against self-incrimination is provided.
The right attaches at the initiation of formal adversary judicial proceedings such as indictment or arraignment. Once attached the accused is entitled to counsel at all critical stages including post-charge lineups and custodial interrogation.
Supporting sources
Police must immediately cease questioning. They may not reinitiate interrogation about any offense until counsel is provided or the suspect himself initiates further communication and validly waives the right.
Supporting sources
No. Photo arrays are not considered a critical stage requiring the presence of counsel even after formal charges have been filed.
Supporting sources
The appointment itself satisfies the right to counsel at that stage. Separate conflict inquiries are required only when joint representation creates a likelihood of divided loyalties.
Supporting sources
…g. , Reck v. Pate , 367 U. S. 433, repeated or extended interrogation, e. g. , Chambers v. Florida , 309 U. S. 227, limits on access to counsel or friends, Crooker v. California , 357 U. S. 433; Cicenia v. Lagay , 357 U. S. 504, length and illegality of detention under state law, e. g. , Haynes v. Washington , 373 U. S. 503,…