Ms. Heinzelman is a phenomenal, non-judgmental attorney. She is an impressive strategist who tailors each defense to attain the best outcome. She treats every client with respect and researches and prepares individually for each case in order to win. Her negotiation skills are incredible! She goes the extra mile from a social work perspective - she takes amazing care of each client - she's the kind of lawyer you want. She's truly on your side. She's nurturing to her client and ferocious to all others.
Dana was appointed to represent me on a felony indited charge because I refused to plead "guilty" for something I did not do. This is true and it happened. Later, and in the end I was found to be a "rare case of innocence" and the trial court admitted their 'plain error' and wrong doing. Dana Henzelman had several months to plan out, investigate, and do whatever needed to be done to stage my defense. Over that summer she never returned my calls (my phone records prove this) and she stated she had an investigator who would question the witnesses in my defense. NEVER HAPPENED! And, she calls me two days before trial and say's I need to come 'So we can go over a strategy for defense." What??
The so-called 'strategy" was to simply put me on the stand (against my protesting to do so) so that the jury would see that the defendant (me) was disabled and they might feel sympathy for me. I asked her to call the witness (arresting officer) up first and get him to explain some questionable issues, but she did not agree. The DA's office even called her and stated the case was going to be tossed out the following day because the officer was not able to attend. Ahh! . . ."Uh uh." She sat right there in front of me and my advocate, called the DA back and arranged "another date" so we COULD go to trial. "Huh?"
My advocate and I decided she must really want "trial experience" because I have not spoken to any other attorneys that would have do as she did. Isn't this "misconduct?" It wasn't in my best interest. In fact, at trial she never had any such investigaor, witness dispositions, NOTHING! Just poor ol' me witnessing against myself, and never any cross examinations of those against me. I have never been arrested for anything in my life! In her closing argument she simply belted out that she was "sorry" that the jury, the judge, the prosecutor and all involved had "wasted their time" by being there that day! What? Offend the whole judicial system as well as minimize the efforts and time put in by those poor jurors by telling them they were a "waste of time." Hmm, that should intimidate the prosecution and bolster the 'sympathy' strategy she thought best. I knew it was really bad when even the DA prosecutor) objected to the court seemingly on my behalf. The judge allowed it to go on, and on and. .
The jury left, came back in before the last jurror was seen even going in to deliberate! "GUILTY!!!!"
I feel this was a verdict against my lawyer for offending the court, and them. I never felt any animosity toward them the court, or anyone EXCEPT my lawyer I think. I was arrested, charged, indited, tried and convicted for something I never did. I even carried out my sentences and had to deal with my children and family and friend's embarrassments and humiliation and fears about all this. As I said, this was all sorted out during my appeal and in "every" instance, from the arrest onward, it was all wrong! It has to be. If you are falsely arrested, then nothing proceeding that can be correct when you are convicted.