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


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



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.