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


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



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.