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


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