CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo Because There’s Hope After the Trial


After The Trial Blog

The After The Trial blog presents insights on ongoing and recent trials around the state of Alabama, including weekly criminal law round-ups.


J.D. Lloyd - Friday, May 06, 2016

Eugene Lee Jones v. State (CR-14-1332)


Jones was convicted of manslaughter as a lesser-included offense of murder, stemming from him killing a woman he suspected of setting him up in a robbery. Jones voluntarily talked to investigators on July 29, 2013, in connection to the death, but eventually stopped the questioning when he invoked his right to counsel. Jones was arrested on an outstanding warrant out of Bessemer. Jones was eventually transported back to Lauderdale County on another warrant stemming from a charge unrelated to the homicide. While still in custody, Jones was asked to submit to a polygraph examination. Jones waived his Miranda rights, submitted to the polygraph, and subsequently made another statement in which he admitted that he strangled the victim. Jones moved to suppress this statement under Edwards v. AZ, 451 US 477 (1981) on the grounds that investigators improperly re-initiated contact after he had invoked his right to counsel. The circuit court denied the motion. AFFIRMED. Relying on MD v. Shatzer, 559 US 98 (2010), the CCA affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress on the grounds that “coercive effect” of re-initiation of interrogation wasn’t present in this case like it was in Edwards. Essentially, the Court held that if enough time has passed since the initial invocation of the right to counsel -- more than 14 days -- there is no presumptively problematic re-initiation as there was in Edwards.


Levins v. State (CR-15-0612)


Bell v. State (CR-15-0618)

The appellants in these two cases were two expungement petitioners who were denied relief at the circuit court level and asked the CCA to reverse the denials of their petitions. APPEALS DISMISSED One may only challenge the denial of their expungement petition by petitioning the Alabama Supreme Court for certiorari review of the denial of the petition for expungement.

John Earle Redfearn, IV v. State (CR-14-0500)


This case involved the denial of a motion to suppress drugs evidence recovered from Redfearn’s body. In February 2012, law enforcement obtained a search warrant of Redfearn’s residence based upon 2 controlled buys that occurred at the residence with Redfearn. Law enforcement executed the SW after they observed Redfearn drive away from the house. He was stopped several miles away while the search of the house was going on and taken back to the house by the detaining officers. While executing the warrant, Redfearn’s girlfriend arrived at the house and eventually told the officers that Redfearn keeps drugs on his person. An officer strip-searched Redfearn at the residence and recovered a bottle containing oxycodone pills in his underwear. Redfearn moved to suppress under Bailey v. US, 133 S.Ct. 1031 (2013). AFFIRMED. The CCA explained that while Bailey held that a suspect may be lawfully detained while police are conducting a search warrant only when the person is in the "immediate vicinity" of the place to be searched, Redfearn was properly detained because the police had probable cause to arrest him based upon the controlled buys previously carried out with Redfearn and observed by law enforcement.


Nathaniel Woods (CR-10-0695)

Alfonso Morris (CR-11-1925)

John Russell Calhoun (CR-14-0779)

In these three cases, the CCA affirmed the denial of Rule 32 relief for death-row inmates without holding evidentiary hearings. There’s not much that’s noteworthy in these opinions outside of the observation that the petitions were summarily denied because each petitioner failed to plead sufficient facts that, if proven true, could entitle them to relief. The vast majority of the factual claims in the three petitions were bare-boned factual allegations. In Woods and Morris, petitioners raised claims that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to present certain expert testimony at trial. The CCA affirmed the summary dismissal of these claims because the petitioner failed to identify an expert and what that expert’s testimony would have been at the pleading stage. It bears repeating that if you’re going to raise an IAC claim, in order to be entitled to a hearing, you have to give the circuit court sufficient factual allegations that the court can conclude that your claims could entitle you to relief if proven true. In the context of IAC based on the failure to call certain expert witnesses, you need to make a proffer as to who that expert would have been and what the testimony would have been at the pleading stage.


Brian Fredick Lucas (CR-14-0744)


Lucas was convicted of first-degree attempted sodomy by forcible compulsion and first-degree sexual abuse stemming from an incident in which he allegedly touched his step-daughter on the mouth with his penis while she was sleeping. The CCA reversed his first-degree sodomy conviction on the grounds that the State’s showing did not present evidence of forcible compulsion -- there was no threat by Lucas or evidence that his actions overcame her earnest resistance. The CCA did enter a judgment convicting Lucas of attempted sexual misconduct.



If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.


Recent Posts


capital punishment robberies constitutional violations criminal justice clarence thomas pell city alabama attempted murder Malone v State fraudulent checks abduction russell calhoun gadsden alabama cherokee county alabama ake v oklahoma pinson alabama brendan dassey, steve avery, making a murderer, scotus, netflix road rage second amendment theft Eutaw Alabama alabama law enforcement agency home repair fraud gun rights Samuel Alito baltimore city circuit court Etowah County Alabama, constitutional law, john earle redfearn IV v state unlawful manufacturing judicial override editorial capital offenses prostitution sting calhoun county alabama Sardis Alabama OJ Simpson Made in America strickland v washington domestic abuse springville alabama pelham alabama state of alabama Joshua Reese 2016 election, abandonment Walker County Alabama theft of property murder lethal injection drugs asia mcclain Glaze v State court of criminal appeal releases operation bullseye boaz alabama christmas shooting Adamsville alabama keith v state drug possession, scotus adger alabama hall v florida mccalla alabama felony assaults sarah koenig shooting death netflix christian guitierez Hillary Clinton, Wesley Adam Whitworth domestic violence Stephen Breyer fort payne alabama fultondale alabama assault ring v arizona arson drug seizure LWOP limestone county alabama moving violations West Alabama bailey v us ferguson missouri hurst v florida abuse Easter William Pryor church robberies § 13A-3-23 drug busts court of criminal appeals executions drug trafficking, huntsville alabama armed robbery debtor prison forced isolation breaking and entering edwards v arizona debit card skimming scams hoover alabama huntsville albertville alabama Alabaster alabama eric sterling morgan county alabama south carolina shelby county Neil Gorsuch Alonzo Ephraim drug crimes Benn v State mcwilliams v dunn marion county Gardendale Alabama narcotics investigation st clair county alabama hoax destructive devices stanley brent chapman illegal gun carry brookside alabama legende v state alabama supreme court fraud Tommy Arthur gun control jerry bohannon minor offenses cullman alabama Marengo County Alabama criminal justice reform, underage drinking dora alabama kidnapping lethal injection utah supreme court warrantless blood draws implied consent alfonso morris operation crackdown Dylann Roof utah v strieff mobile alabama tarrant alabama SCOTUS, US Supreme Court Update making a murderer street racing alabama state of arizona benjamin todd acton capital murder fairfield alabama, drug smuggling parole homicide economic growth morris alabama apprendi v new jersey endangerment of a child mount olive alabama peyton pruitt lamar county social media death penalty, Kay Ivey banville v state public assistance fraud brian fredick lucas madison alabama self defense aziz sayyed brady v maryland lauderdale county alabama shooting moore v texas beylund v north dakota the mannequin challenge birchfield v north dakota crime of passion midazolam car accident Xavier Beasley birmingham alabama kenneth eugene billups department of justice, terell corey mcmullin towles v state homicide rate maryland court of special appeals Jefferson County Alabama campbell v state animal cruelty embezzlement CCA update baldwin county alabama bernard v north dakota nicholas hawkins smith v state pruitt v state blountsville alabama dekalb county alabama sheffield v state Shonda Walker, battles v state rainbow city alabama illegal gambling florence alabama Justice Sotomayor bessemer alabama Pleasant Grove Alabama dothan alabama mountain brook alabama Fentanyl bomb threat stoves v state department of justice anniston alabama, texas Ingmire v State Woods v State Thomas Hardiman montgomery alabama Tracie Todd identity theft Briarwood Presbyterian Church court systems, heritage christian university alabama criminal law roundup adnan syed, greene county alabama sixth amendment fourth amendment OJ Simpson avondale alabama New York Times Kareem Dacar Gaymon decatur alabama serial betton v state tuscaloosa alabama npr Mike Hubbard concealed carry kimberly alabama levins v state habeas corpus relief mike gilotti foley alabama 28 U.S.C. § 2254 fake kidnapping, trussville alabama aiding and abetting nathan woods negligent homicide heflin alabama ex parte briseno steve avery shoplifting eighth amendment, warrior alabama hanceville alabama Lucky D Arcade death penalty § 13A-3-23(d) immunity hearing eugene lee jones v state sexual assault brendan dassey drug activity hurst mandamus blount county alabama Rule 32 Guy Terrell Junior Donald Trump, burglary mulga alabama eleventh circuit ruling talladega superspeedway sentencing law and policy blog summaries criminal mischief oneonta alabama



These recoveries and testimonials are not an indication of future results. Every case is different, and regardless of what friends, family, or other individuals may say about what a case is worth, each case must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances as they apply to the law. The valuation of a case depends on the facts, the injuries, the jurisdiction, the venue, the witnesses, the parties, and the testimony, among  other factors. Furthermore, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Get Free Legal Advice  Contact us for a complimentary legal consultation

I am interested in scheduling a free legal consultation and receiving additional information.

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Thank you, your  entry has been  received.

© 2017 The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd, LLC. All Rights Reserved. |


As required by Rule 7.2(e), Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.