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


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



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.