The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals has upheld the dismissal of a postconviction relief petition filed by death row inmate Jordaan Stanly Creque. The court's decision, issued on June 26, 2026, affects Creque, who was convicted in 2013 for the murders of two individuals during a robbery at a fast-food restaurant. This ruling is significant as it reinforces the standards for postconviction relief in Alabama, particularly for capital cases.
Creque was convicted of capital murder for the shooting deaths of Jeffrey Mark Graff and Jessie Jose Aguilar during a robbery at the Krystal fast-food restaurant in 2011. Following his conviction, Creque sought postconviction relief, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel and other legal errors. His petition was dismissed by the Morgan Circuit Court, leading to his appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.
The case began on August 24, 2011, when Creque, along with two accomplices, planned and executed a robbery at the Krystal restaurant where he worked. During the robbery, Creque shot both Graff and Aguilar, leading to their deaths. He was arrested shortly after the incident and later confessed to the murders. The trial court sentenced him to death in January 2014, following a jury recommendation.
Creque's appeal to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals centered on claims that his trial counsel failed to adequately represent him. He argued that his attorneys did not effectively present evidence regarding his intoxication and mental state at the time of the crime, nor did they properly handle jury selection. Creque also claimed that the circuit court made legal errors in dismissing his petition. However, the court found that these claims were either insufficiently pleaded or without merit.
In its ruling, the court stated, "The circuit court correctly determined that Creque's claims were insufficiently pleaded, without merit, or both." The opinion was delivered by Judge Cole, who emphasized that the burden of pleading rests on the petitioner and that vague allegations do not meet the necessary legal standards. The court noted that Creque's arguments regarding ineffective assistance of counsel were not compelling enough to warrant relief.
The court's decision highlights the rigorous standards for postconviction relief in Alabama, particularly for those sentenced to death. The ruling reinforces the principle that claims must be specific and supported by factual evidence. The court also reiterated that the procedural bars of Rule 32 apply equally to all cases, including those involving capital punishment.
Looking ahead, this ruling may set a precedent for future postconviction petitions in Alabama, particularly those involving claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. It underscores the importance of thorough and well-supported legal arguments in such cases. Creque's case exemplifies the challenges faced by inmates seeking to overturn their convictions, especially in capital cases where the stakes are high.
As for what’s next, Creque may still seek further legal avenues, including a potential appeal to the Alabama Supreme Court. However, the court's ruling significantly narrows the scope for successful postconviction relief. Details regarding any related cases or future appeals were not available in the court filing.