CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo

AfterTheTrial.com... Because There’s Hope After the Trial

BLOG

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.

Court of Criminal Appeal Releases from March 17, 2017

J.D. Lloyd - Monday, March 27, 2017

 

Keith v. State (CR-15-1319)

Keith pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a controlled substance and first-degree unlawful possession of marijuana after police found drugs under the front seat of his car during an inventory search. Officers pulled Keith over when they ran his license plate and realized the tag didn’t match his car. When they ran Keith’s ID, they discovered he had outstanding warrants and placed him under arrest. His car was searched as an inventory search and the drugs were found inside. Keith moved to suppress on the grounds that the search was improper warrantless search.

REVERSED. The Court concluded that the State failed to show that inventory search was carried out “according to standard criteria and on the basis of something other than suspicion of criminal activity.” The Court focused on Ex parte Boyd, 542 So. 2d 1276 (Ala. 1989), where the Alabama Supreme Court concluded that an inventory search was not valid because there was no evidence that law enforcement carried out the search pursuant to policy. Here, the Court found the same deficiencies that the Boyd court found: conclusory statements regarding following inventory policy, a lack of an inventory list, no copy of the policy was presented, and no evidence the officer followed that policy. Judge Joiner wrote a lengthy dissent.

 

Thoughts: I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Alabama Supreme Court take this issue up and ask for clarification for inventory searches andBoyd’s lasting effect. To me, inventory search precedent focuses on whether officers can show a search really was an administrative search and not a fishing expedition.

 

Sheffield v. State (CR-15-1467)

Sheffield was convicted of murder. He argued that he shot the victim in self-defense or by accident. At trial, the State introduced a recording of a heated phone conversation between the defendant and his wife, which was pretty damning to the defense -- she basically said he murdered the victim and didn’t act in self defense. Sheffield tried to invoke martial privilege to exclude the conversation, but the court allowed its introduction via Rule 804(b)(3) -- statements against interest. The State’s theory was that it was against the spouse’s interest for Sheffield to get convicted of murder.

REVERSED. The Court acknowledged that this was a question of first impression -- whether a declarant’s statements made against her spouse’s penal interest may also be considered against her own pecuniary or proprietary interest. In looking at Oregon case law, the Court concluded that the test as to whether a statement fits within the purview of Rule 804(b)(3) comes down to two central questions: (1) Was the declarant’s primary motive in making the statement to hurt or help her own interest; and (2) Was the risk to the declarant-spouse so great that the statements are inherently reliable? Here, the Court concluded the statements were not against Sheffield’s spouse’s interest (she wanted to divorce him), so they should not have been admitted under Rule 804(b)(3). Moreover, the Court concluded that this error wasn’t harmless given slight evidence presented surrounding the fatal moments.

 

Smith v. State (CR13-0055)

Smith was convicted of two counts of capital murder for a brutal kidnapping-murder/robbery-murder he carried out. At sentencing, the victim’s mother and sister testified that they believed the death penalty was an appropriate punishment for Smith. Smith argued on appeal that this testimony was improper.

CONVICTION AFFIRMED; SENTENCE VACATED. The Court concluded the victim’s family’s recommendations were improper victim impact statements regarding recommended sentences under Booth v. Maryland. The Court found these statements to be plain error and vacated the death sentence.

Thoughts: I’m not going to be surprised if this gets reversed by the AL SC saying that this error didn’t rise to the level of plain error. I could see the AL SC using Judge Windom’s dissent as a blue print for re-imposing Smith’s death sentence.

 

Legendre v. State (CR-16-0008)

Legendre was on probation and his PO filed a delinquency report alleging that he failed to report, left the state without permission, didn’t pay supervision fees, failed to pay court-ordered moneys, failed to report to CRO and failed to complete a court-ordered substance abuse program. At the hearing, the PO testified to trying to contact Legendre and how Legendre had missed meetings with her. In revoking, the court concluded that Legendre’s failure to report rose to the level of “absconding,” which allowed the court to fully revoke his probation. Legendre appealed claiming that he had not absconded.

AFFIRMED. The Court concluded that between his failure to report and his failure to communicate with the PO once she had contacted, the State presented sufficient evidence to prove that Legendre absconded and could be fully revoke.

 

Banville v. State (CR-15-1384)

The preclusive bar of Rule 32.2(d) does not bar a second Rule 32 petition if the first Rule 32 petition was based only upon Rule 32.1(f) -- a request to file an out-of-time appeal.

 

Campbell v. State (CR-15-1187)

Stoves v. State (CR-14-1687)

Both of these cases involved a reversal of one conviction on Double Jeopardy grounds (i.e., duplicate offenses), but an affirming of the remaining counts. Both are fact-intensive and not particularly noteworthy.

 

 

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


Tags

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

Archive

DISCLAIMER

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.