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


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



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.