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


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