Maurice Walker was convicted of armed robbery, kidnapping, and possessing a firearm during the commission of a crime after a brief street encounter in which two men demanded money, took cash, and pulled the victim toward a darker area while threatening him. Walker argued that the evidence was insufficient to support any conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed the armed-robbery and firearm convictions but reversed the kidnapping conviction. The court applied the statutory asportation factors and held that the evidence did not establish kidnapping beyond a reasonable doubt on the record presented. The majority treated the movement as insufficiently proven under the governing analysis. A dissent concluded that the victim’s forced movement toward the shadows, after the robbery, reduced his visibility and satisfied the asportation requirement even though it lasted only seconds. The case is notable for showing how Georgia’s kidnapping analysis turns on the purpose, location, and effect of movement rather than duration alone.