Attorneys Complaint Board

The United Citizens of America — a public record of attorney file-request history and citizen complaints

How to read this board

Every entry carries the same three tiers, so the reader can tell what is proven, what is a citizen's account, and what is still open.

Verified — what the record showsDates, letters sent, replies received, deadlines passed, and official records, each with its source. A deadline that passed in silence is a record fact.

Citizen's account — what a whistleblower saysTheir findings, in their words, presented as their account — never as independently verified fact.

Still to verifyWhat is missing, unknown, or unconfirmed. If it is not in the sources, it is listed here, not asserted.

The board covers the attorneys already named in two whistleblowers' files — one whistleblower's defense counsel and prosecutors (Tehama County matters), and the other's defense counsel, prosecutors, and other named attorneys (Shasta County matters). Attorneys named in the files who are not subjects of any complaint are listed at the bottom as not-board-subjects. Sitting judges named in the same allegations are noted separately; they are not attorney entries.

Whistleblower — Tehama County matters: defense counsel

Ken Miller

Role: Criminal defense attorney, Red Bluff — a whistleblower's former defense counsel.
Matters: Tehama County Superior Court 19CR000316, 19CR002530, 21CR000691, 21CR001901; appeal People v. █████, Third District No. C095430.
Office: Law Office of Ken Miller, 1720 Walnut St, Red Bluff — (530) 529-1794. (705 Jefferson St is a stale prior address.)

Verified — what the record shows A client-file demand under California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 1.16(e)(1), was sent Oct 1, 2026 to thedoglawyer@yahoo.com; it bounced the same day (mailbox not found). It was resent Oct 2, 2026 to doglawyer2000@yahoo.com — it has not bounced. That address appears among the emails listed on his State Bar profile (Kenneth Allan Miller #208800, license Active; registered office 22630 Rodeo Ave, Gerber, CA 96035, phone 530-228-5527). Zero replies as of the last compliance check (Oct 31, 2026). The 15-day resend clock expired Oct 17, 2026 silent. A second-round resend / confirm-receipt demand was sent November 6, 2026, expressly not an accusation until receipt is confirmed. Reachability — non-compliant: a client seeking his own file cannot reach his counsel by email through any address on record — the first address bounced, the State Bar-listed address draws no reply.

Whistleblower's account Miller talked the whistleblower into a guilty plea on a drug-possession charge for drugs the whistleblower says they did not possess, after four refusals, promising a felony reduction that never came. The plea, the whistleblower says, created the prohibited-person status behind the later felon-in-possession cases (21CR000691, 21CR001901).

Still to verify Whether he ever received either demand; the court file and plea terms; whether any file was produced after Oct 31, 2026. Second attempt (confirm-receipt resend) sent November 6, 2026 — receipt not yet verified.

Odeh Emad Hijazeen

Role: Criminal defense attorney, Red Bluff — a whistleblower's most recent lawyer.
Matters: Tehama County Superior Court criminal matters (which cases he handled is unestablished).
Office: Law Office of Odeh E. Hijazeen, 334 Washington St, Red Bluff — (530) 466-5245. State Bar No. 285021, licensed since 2012.

Verified — what the record shows A client-file demand under rule 1.16(e)(1) was sent Oct 1, 2026 to odeh.hijazeen@hijazeenlaw.com. He replied the same day, 18:59 PDT: acknowledged the demand, asked for a specific case number, said he was starting a jury trial the next week, and stated office policy — no emailing of material; in-person pickup with ID, authorized third party, or mailed with signature. No files attached. The whistleblower's Oct 9, 2026 follow-up listed the four Tehama case numbers plus appeal C095430 and chose in-person pickup with ID. It was unanswered; the 15-day deadline passed Oct 16, 2026 silent. A follow-up requesting the file by email at no cost was sent November 6, 2026 (verification of ownership offered). Hijazeen did not refuse — he offered pickup/mail and asked for a case number.

Whistleblower's account There was a failure of discovery — as with past lawyers, a failure to list Brady-listed officers.

Still to verify Which case(s) Hijazeen handled and which plea, if any, he was counsel for; email-delivery request sent November 6, 2026 (file by email at no cost, verification offered) — receipt not yet verified; whether any file was produced.

Diane L. Martin

Role: Criminal defense attorney, Red Bluff — a whistleblower's former counsel.
Matters: Tehama County Superior Court criminal matters.
Office: Martin & Logan Attorneys At Law, Red Bluff — (530) 529-4266; info@crloganlaw.com. (Street address differs between sources: 1248 Washington St vs 345 Hickory St #1.)

Verified — what the record shows A client-file request under rule 1.16(e)(1) was sent Oct 1, 2026 to info@crloganlaw.com. Zero replies of any kind as of the last compliance check (Oct 31, 2026). The 15-day deadline passed Oct 16, 2026 silent. A second-and-final demand was sent November 6, 2026, with a 7-day deadline and a State Bar complaint warned. Reachability — non-compliant: the firm is listed as active — Martin and Logan Attorneys At Law, 345 Hickory St #1, Red Bluff, phone (530) 529-4266 — yet a client seeking his own file cannot reach it by email: zero replies to the firm's email (info@crloganlaw.com) across the Oct 1 request and the Nov 6 second-and-final demand.

Whistleblower's account Martin was the whistleblower's former counsel; the file has not been produced. No separate misconduct account on file beyond the unanswered request.

Still to verify Which cases Martin handled; whether any file was produced after Oct 31, 2026; the correct street address. Second and final demand sent November 6, 2026 — receipt not yet verified.

Christopher Logan

Role: Attorney, Law Offices of Logan and Logan, Red Bluff; listed as a Tehama County public defender.
Matters: a whistleblower's (firm level) — the Oct 1, 2026 file request went to the firm, info@crloganlaw.com, via the Martin request.
Note: A second Logan at the firm is unidentified in the sources, and no source establishes a mother-son relationship or who "her" refers to in "Logan and her son."

Verified — what the record shows The firm's email received the Oct 1, 2026 file request. Zero replies of any kind; the deadline passed Oct 16, 2026 silent.

Whistleblower's account None specific to Christopher Logan on file beyond the firm's unanswered request.

Still to verify Whether Christopher Logan personally represented the whistleblower, and on which cases; the identity of the second Logan at the firm; whether any file was produced after Oct 31, 2026.

Ronald McIver

Role: Criminal defense attorney, Red Bluff — a whistleblower's prior counsel.
Matters: Tehama County Superior Court criminal matters (which cases he handled is not recorded).
Office: 334 Washington St, Red Bluff — (530) 527-5113. Public email: rmciverlaw@gmail.com (CPDA county roster).

Verified — what the record shows Public email found: rmciverlaw@gmail.com, listed for Tehama County Public Defenders (Conflict) in the California Public Defenders Association county roster (rev. Sept 16, 2024) — Ronald McIver, PO Box 8578, Red Bluff 96080, phone (530) 527-5113. A first demand under rule 1.16(e)(1) was sent November 6, 2026 to that address; the 15-day clock runs to November 21, 2026. The whistleblower had left a voicemail with the office Oct 1, 2026. Receipt not yet verified.

Whistleblower's account McIver was the whistleblower's prior counsel. No separate misconduct account on file.

Still to verify Which cases he handled; whether the demand is received and what follows. First demand sent November 6, 2026 — receipt not yet verified.

Whistleblower — Tehama County matters: prosecutors

Matthew D. Rogers

Role: District Attorney, Tehama County, since 2019 (Assistant DA 2017).
Matters: Prosecuted the whistleblower's four Tehama criminal cases (19CR000316, 19CR002530, 21CR000691, 21CR001901). Defendant in Bline et al v. Rogers et al, No. 2:2025cv02318 (E.D. Cal.).

Verified — what the record shows June 1, 2022 letter from Rogers states Sheriff Kain "was never listed" on a Brady list (full text still to verify — known only via a Sheriff's Office Facebook summary). The 2025–26 Tehama civil grand jury report (submitted June 20, 2026) states the DOJ referred the Kain matter to the DA "with a Brady List referral for both individuals" and "the District Attorney did not make the Brady List referral concerning the Sheriff."

Whistleblower's account Rogers "exonerated Sheriff Kain in 2022 despite Grand Jury findings, and concealed Kain's Brady status; refused to act on the 2025/26 Grand Jury report."

Still to verify The full text of the June 1, 2022 letter; whether the DA's office disclosed the 2002 Kain material to defense counsel in any case where Kain was a witness.

Gregg Cohen

Role: Tehama County DA 1998–2019; Deputy DA for both Shasta and Tehama counties before that; former federal prosecutor (U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of California). Now Cohen Criminal Law (defense), Red Bluff and Redding.
Matters: DA during the period before the whistleblower's 2019–2021 Tehama cases; recipient of the Nov 18, 2002 Attorney General letter about Kain and Pryatel.

Verified — what the record shows The only confirmed DA / deputy-DA crossover between Shasta and Tehama counties (verified from his own firm bio). The Nov 18, 2002 AG letter (Senior Assistant AG Jo Graves) was addressed to him as DA, stating TAGMET Agent Dave Kain and Corning PD Officer David Pryatel fabricated the basis for the stop of Lucio Altamirano Gomez, with Pen. Code § 118.1 charges declined but the reports directed to be available for Brady discovery.

Whistleblower's account None specific to Cohen on file beyond the record above.

Still to verify Whether the 2002 material was disclosed to defense counsel in any case during Cohen's tenure as DA.

Whistleblower — Shasta County matters: defense counsel

Ryan M. Birss

Role: the whistleblower's Conflict Defender at the time. Now Judge, Shasta County Superior Court — appointed Feb 2, 2026, sworn in Apr 17, 2026.
Matters: Shasta County criminal matters (2013–2019), including the 2018 guilty pleas; named in the whistleblower's federal civil-rights filings.

Verified — what the record shows Birss was the whistleblower's Conflict Defender at the time. He was appointed Judge, Shasta County Superior Court, Feb 2, 2026, and sworn in Apr 17, 2026. A declaration of attorney Ryan H. Birss is among the documents the whistleblower cites in the Nov 5, 2026 updated draft report (contents not yet read).

Whistleblower's account In Whistleblower v. Shon Northam et al., an E.D. Cal. pro se § 1983 complaint (unfiled form, no case number), The whistleblower alleges Birss made false statements to the court and entered a coerced plea for the whistleblower. In a Mezzano complaint dated Apr 2, 2026, the whistleblower alleges Judge Cara Beatty and former attorney Ryan M. Birss participated in coercing the whistleblower's 2018 guilty pleas and forcing the whistleblower to waive appeals. the whistleblower's A14 theory alleges Birss — with Judge Dan Flynn and Judge Cara Beatty — covered up the falsity of the threats charge.

Still to verify The Northam complaint's filing status; the Mezzano complaint's text and filing status; the Birss declaration's contents; any court record of the plea proceedings.

Shon Northam

Role: Criminal defense attorney, Redding; Shasta Conflict Defender contract lawyer.
Matters: Named defendant in Whistleblower v. Shon Northam et al., E.D. Cal. pro se § 1983 complaint (unfiled, no case number).

Verified — what the record shows Still a Redding criminal defense attorney. The Northam § 1983 complaint is an unfiled form — no case number, no filing stamp on the copy read.

Whistleblower's account The whistleblower alleges Northam, Birss, and Carelli jointly suppressed the whistleblower's defense for 3+ years — denied discovery, experts, and motions, paid for non-performance — causing a false conviction. Relief sought: investigation, jury trial, $5,600,000, overhaul of the Conflict Defenders Office.

Still to verify Whether the complaint was ever filed; any court record; Northam's role in specific cases.

John Carelli

Role: Shasta Conflict Defender attorney.
Matters: Named defendant in Whistleblower v. Shon Northam et al. (unfiled, no case number) — same allegations as Northam and Birss.

Verified — what the record shows Named as a defendant in the unfiled complaint; pleaded as a Shasta Conflict Defender contract lawyer.

Whistleblower's account Same joint-suppression allegation as in the Northam entry above.

Still to verify Whether the complaint was ever filed; Carelli's role in specific cases; current position (none found in public sources).

Jeff Jens

Role: Shasta Conflict Defender attorney.
Matters: the whistleblower's matters — named among the whistleblower's Conflict Defender attorneys.

Verified — what the record shows Named as one of the whistleblower's Conflict Defender attorneys; no current position found in public sources.

Whistleblower's account No specific allegation against Jens on file.

Still to verify Which cases Jens handled; current position.

Ted Somers

Role: the whistleblower's attorney — the one counsel excepted from the ineffective-assistance allegations.
Matters: Shasta County criminal matters; attempted the Penal Code § 995 motion to have padded / extra charges removed.

Verified — what the record shows Named in the whistleblower's habeas materials as the whistleblower's attorney (spelled "Summers" in the whistleblower's Nov 5, 2026 dictation; the attorney in the whistleblower's habeas materials is Ted Somers). The whistleblower states Somers attempted the § 995 motion in full.

Whistleblower's account The whistleblower alleges the § 995 motion was denied after an ex parte chambers conference between prosecutor Cody Jones and Judge Cara Beatty, at which they colluded on how to deny it; Jones convinced Beatty to say the whistleblower's threats were "veiled"; Beatty cut Somers off and said she had "already talked to the prosecutor." the whistleblower's theory: if established, a denial of due process and of an impartial tribunal.

Still to verify The § 995 hearing transcript / minute order; Somers's full name and current status.

Kathryn Barton

Role: Habeas counsel for the whistleblower.
Matters: Habeas petitions (Habeas Corpus Legal Argument, 38 pp., no case number / respondent shown).

Verified — what the record shows Named as habeas counsel in the whistleblower's habeas argument brief.

Whistleblower's account The habeas argument alleges Barton dismissed the whistleblower's OSC'd petitions under county-attorney pressure.

Still to verify The habeas petitions and any orders; Barton's full name and current status; whether the dismissal allegation is documented anywhere beyond the whistleblower's own argument.

Whistleblower — Shasta County matters: prosecutors

Cody Jones, now Cody Stenderup

Role: Deputy District Attorney, Shasta County, at the time. Now Court Executive Officer / Clerk of the Court, Shasta County Superior Court (sworn in May 5, 2025).
Matters: Shasta County criminal matters, esp. the Sept 28, 2017 Webb assault case (DA #F-18-07043).

Verified — what the record shows Signed the Oct 10, 2018 DA charging document (DA #F-18-07043): two felony counts for obstructing/resisting Webb and Barnhardt, Sept 28, 2017 incident. State Bar complaint against Cody Jones, State Bar #233271, signed July 14, 2018 (contents and any Bar action not on file). Defendant in the whistleblower's 2:18-cv-02594 and in the Bridgett § 1983 complaint form (unfiled). Now Court Executive Officer and Clerk, Shasta County Superior Court, sworn in May 5, 2025.

Whistleblower's account The whistleblower alleges Jones — directed by DA Bridgett — hid evidence and deliberately interfered with the whistleblower's due process rights to conceal retaliation; that she convinced Judge Beatty in an ex parte chambers conference to call the whistleblower's threats "veiled" and deny the § 995 motion; and that she was part of the cover-up of the falsity of the threats charge.

Still to verify The State Bar complaint's contents and outcome; the § 995 hearing transcript; the 2:18-cv-02594 case record.

Stephanie A. Bridgett

Role: District Attorney, Shasta County (then and now).
Matters: Shasta County criminal matters, 2013–present. Defendant in the whistleblower's 2:18-cv-02594 and the Bridgett § 1983 complaint form (unfiled; events Dec 2012–Aug 2020; $7,400,000 sought).

Verified — what the record shows DA, Shasta County, then and now. State Bar complaint against Bridgett, signed July 15, 2018 (contents and any Bar action not on file). Defendant in 2:18-cv-02594 (malicious prosecution v. Bridgett and Jones) and in the Bridgett § 1983 complaint form (unfiled, no case number).

Whistleblower's account The whistleblower alleges Bridgett was the root of malicious prosecutions against the whistleblower; knew the whistleblower was innocent; prosecuted in retaliation for the whistleblower's federal civil-rights suits; directed assistant district attorneys to lie, misrepresent, and withhold evidence and to overcharge; coerced a guilty plea; and had the whistleblower exiled to Fresno County after release. He alleges this conduct constitutes federal felonies under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241–242.

Still to verify The State Bar complaint's contents and outcome; the 2:18-cv-02594 record; any court finding on the allegations (none on file).

Craig Omura

Role: Deputy District Attorney, Shasta County (2014); Senior Deputy District Attorney (2019–2024).
Matters: Named as a defendant in the whistleblower's complaint against the District Attorney's office and in the Bridgett § 1983 complaint form (unfiled).

Verified — what the record shows Named as a defendant in those filings; rose from Deputy DA (2014) to Senior Deputy DA (2019–2024).

Whistleblower's account No specific act by Omura is alleged on file beyond being named as a defendant.

Still to verify Omura's role in specific cases; current position after 2024.

Whistleblower — Shasta County matters: other named attorneys

Jennifer Ayers

Role: Attorney (private). Named by the whistleblower in the RICO/enterprise allegation and related claims.
Matters: Named in allegation A11 (RICO/enterprise) and A12 (Gov. Code §§ 8314/1090) of the whistleblower's Nov 5, 2026 updated draft report, with Superior Court Judge Jody Burgess and Cherie A. Dubuque.

Verified — what the record shows None on file beyond the naming. The draft itself flags that role, dates, and current status are to be supplied / verified before filing; that § 8314 by its terms applies to officers/employees using public resources and does not, without more, fit a private attorney; and that the specific act each person is alleged to have committed, with date, document, and witness, is not yet in the draft.

Whistleblower's account the whistleblower's stated theory is that the courthouse and county are run to maximize profits for private lawyers, the county, the courthouse, and individuals — court processes, filings, fees, appointments, contracts, custody and case outcomes operated as a revenue/benefit system for insiders and private participants, including, as the whistleblower alleges, private counsel such as Ayers.

Still to verify Everything — role, dates, specific acts, documents, witnesses, current status. Do not present any of this as fact.

John M. Feser Jr.

Role: California Deputy Attorney General at the time; now Senior Counsel, FPPC Legal Division (2025).
Matters: Defending the Fish & Wildlife officers the whistleblower was suing. The Sept 11, 2015 Feser phone call (private, recorded) is central to the whistleblower's matters.

Verified — what the record shows The whistleblower says the Feser call transcript contains no threats to Edwards, Gonzales, or Jackson. Now Senior Counsel, FPPC Legal Division (2025). The transcript is on the whistleblower's site; it was not quoted in the Case 004 brief because the whistleblower's own statements in it are explicit.

Whistleblower's account The whistleblower alleges Feser, defending the Fish & Wildlife officers, reversed a settlement recommendation under pressure from superiors; that the whistleblower was arrested and jailed ~3–3.5 years for speech on that private call; that the speech was not a true threat and is protected by the First Amendment.

Still to verify The settlement-recommendation claim; the Feser call transcript's full contents; Feser's role beyond the call.

Named in the files but not board subjects

These attorneys appear in the sources but no complaint is made against them. They are listed here so the record is complete.

Daniel J. Russo and Tim Allen Pori (Maas & Russo, LLP, Vallejo) — attorneys for plaintiff Yvette Fortier Bline in Bline et al v. Rogers et al, No. 2:2025cv02318 (E.D. Cal.).
Jo Graves — Senior Assistant Attorney General; author of the Nov 18, 2002 letter to DA Gregg Cohen.
Jamaar M. Boyd-Weatherby (Jones Mayer) — attorney for Sheriff Kain's legal team; wrote to Hon. Bottke June 23–24, 2026 requesting withdrawal of the 2025–26 grand jury report.
Andrew D. Plett — Senior Deputy County Counsel; alleged conflicts of interest in Kain's legal team's letter (not an allegation by either whistleblower).

Judges named in the same allegations — not attorney entries

Sitting judges named in the whistleblower's allegations. They are not entries on this board; any judge-related complaint is a separate matter (judicial conduct / Commission on Judicial Performance).

Judge Jody Burgess — named in the RICO allegation (A11) and A12 with Ayers and Dubuque.
Judge Cara Beatty — named in the Mezzano complaint (Apr 2, 2026) and the whistleblower's A14 theory (alleged § 995 ex parte conference with Cody Jones).
Judge Dan Flynn — named in the whistleblower's A14 theory as covering up the falsity of the threats charge.

Open gaps

Appellate counsel for People v. █████, C095430: not on file.
Shasta matters (Heather Keys 25CH-0209249; Caleb Hill 24CH-0206447; █████ DVROs CVDV19-0192987, 25DV-0209339): no attorneys named in the sources.
the whistleblower's "ten counsel failing to investigate for 3 years 4 months" (habeas argument): only six are named in the sources read. Four are unnamed.
"Hedges" / "Hedgesine" (dossier A20): unidentified — no entry. Do not merge with Hijazeen without confirmation from the whistleblower.
Whether any attorney produced a file after Oct 31, 2026 (the last compliance check): the watch continues; not verified here.