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


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



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.