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


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



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.