Johnny Overstreet, Jr. v. Warden, 811 F.3d 1283

In 2007 a Georgia jury convicted Johnny Overstreet of 35 counts arising from armed robberies of five restaurants, including four kidnapping convictions based on moving managers to safes/back offices and sometimes back to the front.
At the time of trial Georgia law (Lyons) treated even slight movement as sufficient asportation for kidnapping.
In 2008 the Georgia Supreme Court in Garza changed the asportation test, holding movement that is "part and parcel" of an independent crime (e.g., moving a victim to find a cashbox or open a safe during a robbery) generally does not satisfy asportation.
Garza and subsequent Georgia appellate decisions (Grimes, Kollie) were decided after Overstreet’s trial but before his direct appeal and applied to convictions not yet finally adjudicated on direct appeal.
Overstreet’s appellate counsel did not raise Garza or related asportation arguments on direct appeal; the Georgia Court of Appeals denied the appeal without being alerted to the changed law.
The Eleventh Circuit held that appellate counsel’s omission was deficient and prejudicial under Strickland and remanded with instructions to grant habeas relief for the four kidnapping counts (counts 2, 10, 17, 26).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether appellate counsel was ineffective for not arguing insufficiency of evidence for kidnapping under Garza	Overstreet: appellate counsel unreasonably failed to raise Garza; movement was "part and parcel" of robbery so asportation insufficient	State: relied on existing precedent at trial (Lyons) and appellate denial; implicitly that counsel's choices were reasonable	Held: Appellate counsel was ineffective under Strickland; but for the omission the kidnapping convictions would almost certainly have been reversed

Garza v. State, 670 S.E.2d 73 (Ga. 2008) (adopted new test excluding movement that is "part and parcel" of an independent crime from asportation)
Lyons v. State, 652 S.E.2d 525 (Ga. 2007) (pre-Garza rule treating even slight movement as sufficient asportation)
Kollie v. State, 687 S.E.2d 869 (Ga. App. 2009) (reversed kidnapping convictions where movement to safe and back was part of robbery)
Grimes v. State, 678 S.E.2d 167 (Ga. App. 2009) (similar reversal where victim moved to money cabinet then to register during robbery)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (governs ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011) (deference standards for federal habeas review of state-court adjudications)