CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo

AfterTheTrial.com... Because There’s Hope After the Trial

BLOG

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.

CCA CASELAW UPDATE - APRIL 2016

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.



 

Alabama Supreme Court Ruling Makes Illegal Hunting Prosecutions Tougher for the State

J.D. Lloyd - Saturday, October 31, 2015
The Alabama Supreme Court released an interesting opinion reversing some hunting-offense convictions today. In Ex parte Ex parte W.F., W.L.C., and R.J.J. the Court threw out the youthful offenders convictions for hunting after dark, hunting from a public road, and hunting with the aid of an automobile.
 
As deer season approaches, all the hunters out there might want to pay close attention:
 
FACTS
Basically, a conservation officer believed he heard shots being fired from a truck driven by these defendants around 6:30/6:45 at night. He didn't see anyone fire a weapon or even a muzzle flash --essentially, he only heard what he thought were shots fired from a gun. No shell casings were recovered and the deputy sheriff that later investigated couldn't determine whether shots had recently been fired from the rifle found in the defendant's vehicle.
 
The defense argued the State couldn't make a prima facie case based on this paltry evidence. The State relied on Rogers v. State, 491 So. 2d 987 (Ala. Crim. App. 1985) to defend the sufficiency of its showing, which held that the State presents a sufficient case of "night hunting" when it shows "that the accused (1) is in an area which deer or other protected animals are thought to frequent, (2) has in his possession a light, and (3) has in his possession a weapon or other device suitable for taking, capturing, or killing an animal protected by state law, (4) at night." The circuit court and Court of Criminal Appeals agreed, relying on Rogers for all the offenses.
 
 
HOLDING - REVERSED AND RENDERED
The Court rejected Rogers on the theory that attempts to commit these hunting offenses require more than the Rogers standard provides. The Court's discussion here is an interesting look into  "the commencement of consummation" of a criminal offense, focusing on the holding of ATM v. State, 804 So. 2d 171 (Ala. 2000). Because Rogers did not accurately encompass "attempt" jurisprudence, the Court overruled that decision. In applying the accurate law regarding attempts, the Court found the State's case insufficient and vacated and rendered the convictions.
 
This case is a great standard for assessing the sufficiency of "attempt" prosecutions.

 

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


Tags

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

Archive

DISCLAIMER

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.