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


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



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.