When it comes to having a lawyer present during the appeals process, it's been my experience that in 99% of the cases a lawyer is not necessary. Think of it like this:
If we lived in a shall issue state, than the process of obtaining a ccw is strictly a legal one. So an attorney may be necessary because at an appeal he/she knows the law and can answer or argue any legal questions that may need to be addressed. However, since we live in a may issue state, the process, especially the appeals process is entirely up to the judge's discretion. (Barring any disqualifications such as felonies, drug convictions, domestic violence issues...at which an appeal is useless). Case in point: 64Falconguy-an attorney would never be able to help him, I mean what would his attorney really be able to say? "Your honor, my client is sorry and since his incident 10yrs ago he has been productive and has no issues with the law..." All of which is better said directly by the person appealing. The appeal is the time when you represent yourself to the judge your character, what type of person you are (completely different from shall issue). So in all reality, an attorney could hurt rather than help you. Of course there are exceptions to every rule and I have no facts about what your buddy is facing and "I am not an attorney, so anything I say should not be construed as legal advise."
Update: I just read elsewhere that your buddy plead guilty to an assault charge 20yrs ago. I will admit 20 yrs is a long time ago. If your buddy decides to appeal what could be in his favor is: It has been 20yrs ago, and hopefully he has had NO record within that time. He may be able to argue that he was young and since then he has matured enough to better deal with circumstances that led to his conviction (record will prove that), and maybe he can argue that since that time he has engaged in anger management counseling (documentation would be required), or perhaps he can argue that he took immediate responsibility and plead guilty to the charge. There would be NO reason to go into the details of the conviction (unless of course the Judge asks) for instance: "well your honor, I plead to the charge only to get rid of it, but actually I was innocent." As far as the judge is concerned the conviction is proof of guilt. Remember MAY ISSUE means there is NO legal obligation for the judge to issue a ccw. So my opinion is that since it is NOT a legal question an attorney may not be needed.
