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


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



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.