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.

Adnan Syed of "Serial" Granted New Trial

J.D. Lloyd - Thursday, March 29, 2018

(Image Credit: Getty Images)


In the ongoing case of Adnan Syed, made famous by NPR's "Serial" podcast, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals has ruled in Adnan's favor and has ordered that he be granted a new trial. In a long decision, the Court determined that Adnan's trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to investigate Asia McClain, a witness who purportedly could have provided Adnan with a crucial alibi for the window of time he was allegedly killing Hae Min Lee in a Best Buy parking lot.



The case was on appeal by both Adnan and the State of Maryland. In the Baltimore City Circuit Court, Adnan had been granted a new trial based upon counsel's failure to question the State's cell phone tower data expert about a warning on a fax cover sheet to the data that warned about the data's unreliability. The circuit court had rejected the claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate Asia. Both sides appealed their adverse rulings.


And both sides won. The Court of Special Appeals reached the opposite conclusions than that of the Baltimore City Circuit Court. The Court found the circuit court was wrong to grant Adnan relief on the fax cover sheet issue, but was also wrong to deny relief based on counsel's failure to investigate Asia's alibi. The Court explained:
McClain’s testimony, if believed by the trier of fact, would have made it impossible for Syed to have murdered Hae. Trial counsel’s deficient performance prejudiced Syed’s defense, because, but for trial counsel’s failure to investigate, there is a reasonable probability that McClain’s alibi testimony would have raised a reasonable doubt in the mind of at least one juror about Syed’s involvement Hae’s murder, and thus “the result of the proceedings would have been different."


When you're complaining that your trial counsel screwed up and denied you your Sixth Amendment right to effective representation, you have to show two things: (1) that some error occurred, and (2) that the error prejudiced you in a way that calls the results of the case into question. You have to show a "reasonable probability" that the results of trial would have been different. You don't have to prove innocence (it helps), but you've got to show more than just "this hurt my case." Here, it's easy to see how a jury could have believed an alibi about Adnan's whereabouts. There was no definitive evidence about where he was -- just circumstantial evidence that was dubious.


I don't practice in Maryland and am not well-versed in Maryland appellate procedure, but it looks like the State (or Adnan) might ask a higher court -- the Maryland Court of Appeals -- to review the decision. It doesn't look like either side has a right to appeal to this court and would have to ask for that court to review.


Like you, I'm anxiously awaiting a Sarah Koenig update...


Recent Posts


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



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.