Mercer v. Johnson, 304 Ga. 219

Summary

The Georgia Supreme Court reversed the denial of Jessie Mercer's habeas corpus petition. Applying the asportation factors from Garza v. State, the court held that the movements of Richard and Parchando Love during an armed home invasion were insufficient to support Mercer's kidnapping convictions. The court concluded that the evidence did not show movement substantially isolating either victim from protection or rescue.

Holdings

1. Garza effected a substantive change in the law governing asportation and therefore applies retroactively to Mercer’s habeas proceeding.
2. Moving Mr. Love from a standing position to the floor did not constitute asportation sufficient to support his kidnapping conviction.
3. The movements of Mrs. Love, including dragging her to the safe and back to the bedroom, did not constitute asportation sufficient to support her kidnapping conviction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the movement of Mr. Love from a standing position to the floor constituted asportation sufficient to support his kidnapping conviction.
2. Whether the movement of Mrs. Love to a safe and back to the bedroom, as well as the other movements during the home invasion, constituted asportation sufficient to support her kidnapping conviction.
3. Whether the asportation standard announced in Garza v. State applied retroactively to Mercer’s state habeas proceeding.

Disposition

reversed