Wilkerson v. Hart
294 Ga. 605
| Ga. | 2014Background
- Wilkerson was convicted of kidnapping among other offenses based on the 2001 Statesboro home-invasion robbery facts.
- Garza v. State governs when asportation is shown beyond incidental movement for pre-2009 kidnapping; Garza later was superseded by statute for post-2009 offenses.
- Wilkerson filed a habeas corpus petition arguing the Garza standard was not met and that the evidence failed to prove asportation.
- The habeas court rejected his Garza-based claim but found no ineffective assistance of counsel.
- The Supreme Court of Georgia reversed in part on the kidnapping convictions and affirmed the ineffective-assistance ruling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Garza requires asportation beyond incidental movement | Wilkerson argues movement failed Garza test | State contends sufficient movement under Garza factors | Asportation insufficient; kidnapping convictions vacated |
| Retroactivity of Garza to habeas cases | Garza rule retroactive to pre-2009 cases through substantive-change analysis | Statutory changes post-2009 govern retroactivity | Garza retroactively applicable in habeas context |
| Procedural default and cause/prejudice in habeas review | Defaulted sufficiency claim should be addressed due to cause and prejudice | Procedural bar stands absent cause and prejudice | Habeas court properly considered the claim via cause/prejudice framework |
| Whether trial counsel's closing-argument rights were ineffective | Two hours allowed; counsel inadequately limited by court | Counsel could still argue effectively; no prejudice shown | No ineffective-assistance relief; lack of showing of reasonable probability of different outcome |
Key Cases Cited
- Garza v. State, 284 Ga. 696 (Ga. 2008) (asportation must be more than incidental under pre-2009 statute)
- Luke v. Battle, 275 Ga. 370 (Ga. 2002) (substantive-law retroactivity in collateral review)
- Sellars v. Evans, 293 Ga. 346 (Ga. 2013) (cognizable habeas issues and cause/prejudice mechanics)
- Henderson v. State, 285 Ga. 240 (Ga. 2009) (kidnapping statute and danger requirement guidance)
- Brown v. State, 288 Ga. 902 (Ga. 2011) (Garza factors can be satisfied with three of four factors)
- Perkins v. Hall, 288 Ga. 810 (Ga. 2011) (ineffective assistance; requirement of showing prejudice)
- Hardeman v. State, 281 Ga. 220 (Ga. 2006) (closing argument duration and strategic impacts on defense)
- Valenzuela v. Newsome, 253 Ga. 793 (Ga. 1985) (default rule regarding habeas and miscarriage of justice)
- Henderson v. Hames, 287 Ga. 534 (Ga. 2010) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of asportation and related facts)