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


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



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.