State v. Nankervis
295 Ga. 406
| Ga. | 2014Background
- State v. Nankervis, Georgia Supreme Court, decided June 30, 2014, addressing trafficking methamphetamine under OCGA § 16-13-31 f/g and related manufacturing penalties.
- Nankervis was indicted in 2011 for trafficking methamphetamine, failure to maintain lane, and open container, and pleaded not guilty.
- Jury found Nankervis guilty on all counts, with a post-verdict instruction leading to a secondary verdict of manufacturing methamphetamine.
- Trial court ruled § 16-13-31 f/g unconstitutional and sentenced under § 16-13-30(b) via rule of lenity; the State appealed.
- Court held the trafficking statute constitutional and that the rule of lenity does not apply; case remanded for proper judgment and sentencing.
- Evidence showed methamphetamine manufacturing paraphernalia and drugs in Nankervis’ van, supporting trafficking conviction under § 16-13-31 f.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constitutionality of § 16-13-31 f/g | State argues statute constitutional | Nankervis argues unconstitutional | Statute constitutional; no due process/equal protection violation |
| Application of the rule of lenity | State contends lenity does not apply | Nankervis contends lenity should apply | Lenity not implicated; specific statute controls; rational basis supports distinction |
| Sufficiency of evidence for trafficking conviction | State asserts sufficient evidence | Nankervis contends insufficiency | Evidence sufficient to support trafficking conviction under Jackson v. Virginia |
Key Cases Cited
- Favorito v. Handel, 285 Ga. 795 (2009) (rational basis test applies to substantive due process/equal protection)
- Harper v. State, 292 Ga. 557 (2013) (rational basis review for unequal treatment)
- United States v. Torres, 33 F.3d 130 (1st Cir. 1994) (rational basis approach to penalties for substantial assistance)
- United States v. Musser, 856 F.2d 1484 (11th Cir. 1988) (support for substantial-assistance disparity rationales)
- Richards v. State, 290 Ga. App. 360 (2008) (specific vs. general penalties; precludes lenity where statute is specific)
- Woods v. State, 279 Ga. 28 (2005) (specific over general penal provisions; lenity not implicated)