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


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



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.