that the intent to cause physical injury was an element of the offense of third-degree assault so that he could formulate a defense to that charge. Because the complaint contains all the essential elements of the charge, it is valid. II. Next, the appellant argues that his rights were violated because the record does not reflect that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to counsel. The State argues that the appellant did not have a right to counsel. Therefore, it argues that no waiver was necessary. The appellant was convicted of third-degree assault, a Class A misdemeanor. See § 13A-6-22, Ala.Code 1975. The right to counsel does not attach in a misdemeanor case if “ ‘ “the de fendant is not sentenced to a term of imprisonment. If an uncouns a.Cr.App.1997) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, the appellant had a constitutional
recognizing constitutional right to effective counsel holding that a defendant has a constitutional right to counsel as a matter of right on direct appeal holding that culberson who had been sentenced to three suspended terms of imprisonment had a constitutional right to counsel holding that a term of imprisonment begins at the time a prisoner is sentenced holding that a conditionally suspended sentence of imprisonment cannot be imposed on an indigent in a misdemeanor case who is denied counsel