I retained Harwell & Gray in February 2026 to represent my daughter, who was incarcerated and facing serious criminal charges. Based on our experience, I strongly encourage anyone considering this firm to read the following before retaining them.
The pattern I experienced was consistent: promised jail visits that did not happen, repeated follow-ups necessary to obtain basic information, requests concerning my daughter's representation that were not handled as communicated, commitments to provide financial records that went unfulfilled, and an attorney who raised his voice at me for continuing to seek answers.
These problems began almost immediately after I hired the firm.
Within the first two weeks, I was already contacting the office about missed jail visits. Christina, the firm's paralegal, repeatedly communicated plans to visit my daughter. By February 13, I had counted three appointments that had been canceled or had not occurred as communicated. The office acknowledged only one.
One visit Christina personally told me would happen on a Monday was later described by the office as never having been scheduled. Another anticipated visit was canceled. My daughter was incarcerated, had limited communication with the outside world, and was depending on the legal team we hired to meet with her.
She was sitting in jail waiting for people who had told us they were coming.
Attorney Gray eventually met with my daughter, but the level of attorney contact and follow-through fell far short of what I expected. I repeatedly had to contact the office to determine what was happening rather than receiving reliable updates.
When Gray and Harwell separated professionally, I specifically requested that Harwell wait until my daughter decided which attorney she wanted to continue representing her. He visited her at the jail anyway. During a later conversation, he explained that he believed he was legally obligated to keep the case moving. That was his explanation, but it did not change the fact that I had explicitly asked him to wait.
The communication problems continued even after the representation ended.
Beginning in June, I repeatedly requested an accounting of my payments and an explanation of how the firm's fees and my refund were calculated. I was told on multiple occasions that additional information would be provided.
In July, I was promised a record of my payments. In September, I was told the information would be sent the following day. Neither commitment was fulfilled as communicated.
After four months of emails, telephone calls, and text messages, I received what appeared to be the same invoice attachments originally provided in June.
On October 30, Jonathan Harwell called me. He raised his voice and criticized the number of times I had contacted his office. He stated that my repeated inquiries had caused confusion among his staff. He also told me that Indiana law did not require him to provide the itemized billing information I was requesting.
I did not repeatedly contact this firm because I wanted to create problems for its staff. I contacted them because visits did not happen as promised, information was not provided when promised, and questions went unanswered.
My daughter needed dependable legal representation while incarcerated. I needed to know that the people we hired would follow through on their commitments and communicate with us.
Our experience was one of repeated missed commitments, inadequate communication, and a lack of accountability when concerns were raised.
Based on our experience, I would not hire this firm again or recommend it to anyone seeking criminal defense representation. read more
