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


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



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.