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


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



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.