MIKE DANIELS was rude and short with me the entire time. At the IPTC, Daniels met with the prosecutor without the defendant. When he came out, he had me follow him into the library and stated, "we're going to trial". He never said there was a plea deal offered. He and the prosecutor knew 2 days before the Aug 2024 trial of subpoenas that were filed 2 weeks prior. They both blamed me for filing subpoenas for friends of the plaintiff. He filed to withdraw as attorney 2 days before trial. Daniels emailed me there may be a hearing the next day and another email stated there was no hearing as his motion was refused. He never mentioned the subpoenas. I was called into an emergency hearing the next day. That was when I found out about the subpoenas the plaintiff had filed. The case was put on hold as Daniels then stated I needed a Rule 11 hearing as I was furious with their claims. Daniels had subpoenaed my witnesses for the first trial but refused to for the second trial. He said they were "unnecessary witnesses". When entering the courtroom for the second trial date, Daniels said "THE NAILS ARE IN YOUR COFFIN". He made no attempt to present any evidence for my defense. Daniels barely questioned the prosecution's witnesses. He never questioned evidence presented by the prosecution even though he was told the screen shot was fraudulent. Prosecutors said the video was from the day after the arrest but the PPD records supervisor emailed me there were no BWC videos for the encounter the day after the initial arrest, and I have that email. His refusal to subpoena my witnesses was a clear indication he had no intention to defend me. This misdemeanor case took nearly 2 years from arrest and 14 months from arraignment, he refused to accept this was a violation of the speedy trial act. He stated several times that cops were allowed to lie in court and in their reports. Daniels' B.S. cost a handicapped 74 yr old woman that had never even had a traffic ticket, with being judged guilty of a crime that should have been dismissed. His actions are a clear case of INEFFECTIVE (NONEXISTENT) ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN VIOLATION OF THE AZ and US CONSTITUTIONS..