MOTION TO DISMISS COUNSEL
Written by
Lakeith Sharif
Mailed April 14, 2005
In the 282nd Judicial District Court
Dallas County, TexasState of Texas
v.
Lakeith Amir-SharifMotion to Dismiss Counsel
CAUSE NO. F0273127Coming now, Defendant Lakeith Amir-Sharif (referred to hereafter as 'defendant') acting pro.se and files this Motion to dismiss Counsel Thomas Grett, and the Dallas County Texas, Public Representation in the above entitled and numbered cause (and any & all other legal matters pending in a Dallas County Texas Court).
Slipshod, Incompetent, Prejudiced, and Ineffective Assistance of Counsel are the primary grounds in support of said motion.
More specifically, the defendant would show this court the following:
1) The Dallas County Texas Public Defender's Office is operating with insufficient funding and staffing issues which have caused said office to be overwhelmed by the ever increasing number of indigent defendants they are responsible for representing. Because of this, the defendant (and others) are receiving inadequate and ineffective assistance of counsel.
2) On 02/15/05, Lawyer Thomas R. Grett and the Dallas County Texas Public Defender's Office was assigned to represent defendant at a probation revocation hearing before the court despite 'Self-Representation' having been requested by defendant on this date and time.
3) As counsel of record, Thomas Grett (referred to hereafter as 'counselor') is burdened with an excessive caseload which impedes and hinders his ability to provide defendant with the level of competent and effective representation expected per the Texas and United States Constitutions.
Moreover, counselor is forced to pick and choose which defendant will receive more of his time than others, and from 02/15/05 to date, this defendant has come up on the short end of the stick in regard to violation of U.S.C.A. 6th Amendment.
4) Defendant was arrested on a warrant on 02/10/05 for an act(s) alleged to be a violation of the terms/conditions of probation (a never filed Class "C" misdemeanor) and a 1st time failure (in two years of probation) to report to the probation office), and has continually been in custody for the past 63 days to date.
5) With the knowledge and consent of counselor's supervisors, Lynn Pride-Richardson and Jeanette Green, counselor has been permitted to act with impunity, which has resulted in some of the following actions and inactions (in violation of 6 & 14 Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Texas Constitution, as well as Codes of Criminal Procedure):
(a) Counselor has NEVER taken time to discuss or explain to the defendant personally or in writing, his legal rights at revocation proceedings/hearing; the procedures required by law for the court to determine whether a violation occurred, and if the violation should result in revocation of defendant's probation;
(b) Counselor has NEVER taken time to discuss or explain to defendant personally or in writing what evidence is admissible or what the state's Burden of Proof is in these proceedings;
(c) Counselor has NEVER taken time to discuss or explain to defendant personally or in writing, what if an, defense preparations he will or has taken in response to the state's Revocation Motion;
(d) Counselor has NEVER conducted an interview with defendant nor asked the defendant any information for or to begin preparation for defendant's defense, such as (1) facts surrounding alleged violations, (2) names and contact information of witnesses, which included both defendant's probation officers, (3) Defendant's financial condition so bond could be set accordingly, and (4) existence and whereabouts of documentary evidence;
(e) Counselor has NEVER performed a factual investigation, especially of the specious claims purportedly made to counsel, the Court and the District Attorney by Cathy J. Hawkins (referred to hereafter as "state witness"), whose request for a permanent protective order in a completely unrelated civil matter has taken center stage in these revocation matters and has thus far, according to counsel, been the sole basis for why this defendant continues to languish in jail after 63 days as of April 14, 2005.
(f) Counselor has NEVER caused any physical investigation of the current matter, despite the state witness' ordeal.
6) Counsel has assonated defendant's credibility by repeatedly requesting competency evaluations and accepting state witness' claims, comments and otherwise over his client's rather than taking the time to do what any effective lawyer would do and that is VERIFY information.
Counselor NEVER took time to verify anything defendant told him or tried to tell him. Counselor NEVER did any of the following:
(a) Contact Manager (Ms. Johnson) of Lakeland Manor to see if defendant was at risk of eviction if forced to stay in jail 45 days or more.
(b) Contact Morton Plant Hospital (727- 462-7000) to learn that defendant's mother was having lung cancer surgery and would need defendant's help afterwards.
(c) Contact Dallas Community College and find out that defendant was a student at the Richland Campus on Abrams & Walnut in Dallas Texas,
(d) Contact family, friends and other witnesses including defendant's Metro Care case worker Monique Ferrila and both defendant's (In-house and Field) probation officers, Ms. Sue McDaniels and Michael Russel (972-487-0171), all of whom could provide the defense and court clear and convincing testimony, and/or physical and documentary evidence to corroborate everything defendant has told or tried to tell counselor, the court, and everyone about defendant's relation to the state witness and the real basis for her manipulation of the protective order court/proceedings following defendant's latest alleged 'act of infidelity'.
(e) Review calls state witness received from Ms. Alicia L. Smith (469-272-9048 and 972-283-1278) on or about Feb. 7, 2005 wherein the state witness claimed to be pregnant by defendant; and investigate calls from other women, particularly Bonita Oritz, Paula Robinson, and Ayanna Thompson, whom, up until defendant's date of arrest on Feb. 10, 2005, have picked defendant up and dropped defendant off at the shared residence of the state witness and defendant, which address is listed in the protective order.
(7) Had counselor provided defendant with the bare minimum of effective and adequate assistance, the court's unwarranted concerns for the state witness would have ceased. Also exposed would have been that the state witness has some MHR issues of her own that she's been dealing with as a rape survivor and abused child: Counselor also would have discovered through his investigation that, after requesting a P.O. in November (not December as counselor alleges) 2004, the state witness helped pay defendant's bond later that same evening, and came and picked defendant up from outside Farmers Branch Police Station, and this defendant and the state witness went home where they both have resided together without incidences of alleged violence.
(8) Counselor NEVER met with any witnesses or defendant prior to any of the listed court dates to prepare (everyone) for the hearings which have yet to take place. Defendant had witness come only to learn the hearing was reset. This also happened to defendant's Metro Care case worker Monique Ferrila (469-879-5066) on March 4th, 2005, and to other family members as well,
(9) Counselor's meritless and biased request for court orders subjecting defendant to humiliating competency evaluations has caused a distrust to come between this client and the attorney of record. Under due process consideration of fundamental fairness, the court should withdraw counsel as repeatedly requested by this defendant.
(10) Defendant is anything but incompetent or delusional as alleged. But he is rightfully frustrated and feels counsel abused his discretion with these incompetency claims which have amounted to nothing more than low-visibility forms of harassment, retaliation and reprisal because the defendant told counsel of the Texas Bar complaint filed against him and his office/supervisors Lynn Pride-Richardson and Jeanette Green.
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, Lakeith Amir-Sharif requests that the court grant this motion and dismiss Thomas Grett and his office from all further representation in the above entitled and numbered cause, and grant any other relief deemed appropriate to which the defendant may be entitled.
Lakeith Amir-Sharif
Dallas County JailCertificate of Service
I hereby certify that on April 4, 2005, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Motion to Dismiss Counsel was served via regular U.S. mail on the District Attorney's office in Dallas, Texas, the Public Defender's Office, the Office of the Clerk of the Court, and the 282nd District Court.
ORDER
On ______________, came to be considered Lakeith Amir-Sharif's Motion to Dismiss Counsel and said Motion is hereby (Granted) (Denied)_______________
Judge PresidingMOTION TO COMPEL PROMPT REVOCATION HEARING
by Lakeith Sharif
Written May 3, 2005
