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


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



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.