(A)  Denial of right to counsel at probation interview of defendant.  Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(b)(2) requires the probation officer to allow defense counsel to attend the probation officer’s interview of the defendant upon request.[214]

[214] United States v. Tisdale, 952 F.2d 934 (6th Cir. 1992); United States v. Herrera-Figueroa, 918 F.2d 1430 (9th Cir. 1990).  This interview, however, has not been considered a “critical stage” of the proceedings at which counsel’s presence is required in all cases.  United States v. Hicks, 948 F.2d 877 (4th Cir. 1991).

POST CON RELIEF - GROUNDS - RIGHT TO COUNSEL - POTENTIAL SENTENCE SUFFICIENT FOR APPLICATION OF RIGHT TO COUNSEL
Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654, 122 S.Ct. 1764, 152 L.Ed.2d 888 (2002) (suspended sentence that can potentially be transformed into actual incarceration is sufficient to trigger the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in misdemeanor cases).
NOTE: Misdemeanor convictions in which no sentence, or suspended sentence, to custody was imposed can still trigger immigration consequences. In these cases, the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not apply, so post-conviction relief would not be possible on grounds of denial of counsel or ineffective assistance of counsel.

Tenth Circuit

POST CON RELIEF - SENTENCE - GROUNDS - INADEQUATE TIME FOR ARGUMENT
United States v. Algarate-Valencia, 550 F.3d 1238 (10th Cir. Dec. 30, 2008) (any error in failure to give defendant's attorney adequate time to speak at sentencing was not plain error affecting defendant's substantial rights).