Oregon Supreme Court 03-04-10
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Kidnapping - Asportation
This case provides the counterbalance to Wolleat and Zweigart, recent S.Ct. cases that stand for the proposition that moving somebody around in their home is not kidnapping if it is incidental to another crime like Murder or Assault. Or, as the S.Ct. today notes:
Those cases demonstrate that, when the only evidence of a defendant's intent is physical movement of the victim, a reasonable juror may only infer intent to interfere substantially with a victim's freedom of movement if there is 'evidence that the defendant moved the victim a substantial distance."
In today's case, however, there was evidence of defendant's intent to interfere substantially with freedom of movement. Crazy ex-boyfriend grabs victim as she's walking out her door, pushes her back in and into her bedroom, where he repeatedly prevents her from escaping or calling for help by physically restraining her, taking her cell phone, stifling her screams and choking her when she attempted to escape. In fact, the whole point seemed to be to hold her hostage while he told her that he couldn't live without her. Thus, there was evidence from which a trier of fact could have found that defendant's acts were more than just incidental to assault and menacing. State v. Mejia