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


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



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.