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


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



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.