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


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



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.