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


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



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.