Tanesha Canzater, Attorney at Law

I was assigned Tanesha Canzater as my attorney.

I was hoping it would work out really well and that I might be surprised to find someone who was actually working for my son and not for special interests or to obstruct justice.

At this point, I feel I am only able to state we might have a misunderstand which I am hoping to clear up. It has been 3 weeks, and I have sent minimal email, requesting a response to 1 simple, very basic question. "Are you willing to request records I need for this case?"

I sent out my first email and made a list of what I needed. I told her if there was any kind of problem, please let me know. I was ignored for a week.

Finally I called and she told me, over the phone, that she refused to request any of my records.

I sent another email, asking for that same response in writing. She ignored it for another week. Then she sent an email claiming our discussion was about the appeals process and how it "could take years" and she directly avoided answering my pertinent question about whether or not she is going to begin doing what a normal lawyer would do, and request records.

She avoided my question a second time, but had told me over the phone that she refused.

In her second email she said I could dismiss her if I wanted to.

I am not going to "dismiss" her when I do not have evidence of why I would be dismissing her. I think maybe she or some group wants me to dismiss her and have it look like I am just disagreeable.

If I have her admission, in writing, that she has refused to cooperate and even request preliminary records that I need, I have evidence that she is deliberately stalling, not working for me but for some other group, and that she is obstructing justice.

I think Tanesha knows this.

Because I sent yet my THIRD email, specifically asking her to admit to her refusal to request these records, in writing and she has ignored my third email.

I sent her email number FOUR just now, and said I might be mistaken and perhpas we have misunderstood eachother, but I need to have, in writing, her admission that she WILL or WON'T request records that I need.

Because she has been ignoring this question and avoiding it, after it has been 3 weeks, I said simply that if she chooses to ignore my request for a simple yes or no answer this time, I will then take her answer to be "no" and proceed to dismiss her and use our correspondence as proof of her unwillingness to cooperate or do even the bare minimum for this job.

I noticed she has potential conflicts of interest, but if she is willing to change her answer and request records, I don't see why it couldn't work out. However, if she is just going to stonewall, it is further evidence that her conflicts of interest are a danger to my defense and she should have recused herself from the start.

It's very simple.

But I know what's going on.

And I am not recusing a lawyer without evidence to show WHY it was reasonable for me to recuse. Having someone say something over the phone and ignore you for awhile isn't sufficient. Having someone refuse to put their response in writing, and ignore for 3 weeks, is sufficient and grounds for having a new attorney appointed.

When I asked her what her legal background was, she told me what schools she went to for law but was reticent to tell me about the undergrad work. She switched from Southern Baptist to Roman Catholic Benedictine school St. Martin's and then went on to Catholic schools in Seattle (I believe, bc I think that's the affiliation).

I don't have a problem with it.

But when she is refusing to request records, I start to wonder where the hell she's coming from.

For me, the real test of whether a lawyer is going to work for ME and MY SON and not special interests, or other groups, is if they are willing to request records that pertain to my case and can be used to win an immediate appeal.

So far, all of my lawyers, whom I dismissed, REFUSED to do this and obstructed my access to evidence. They have all deliberately tried to prevent me from getting, viewing, or entering the records into evidence.

That is a serious problem. It's in direct violation of the mandate, per State law, for an indigent person to have a REASONABLE defense. The "right" in this state, is not simply for any old defense or public defender, but for a "reasonable defense".

Now, if it is "reasonable" for me to ask a lawyer to help with requesting records for my case, and it IS, then if that lawyer refuses to do this, this is evidence showing the lawyer is NOT providing a reasonable defense and is unlikely to improve in the future.