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


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