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


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



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.