Moving the robbery victim from her backyard to her house was insufficient asportation to support a conviction of kidnapping for robbery (PC 209(b)(1)). Where the backyard was surrounded by trees and no evidence showed it was within earshot of neighbors, the movement did not increase the risk of harm beyond that incidental to the robbery. The opinion also rejected defendant’s claim that the robbery count should be reversed because he abandoned the stolen goods prior to reaching a place of temporary safety, but reversed the grand theft of a firearm conviction because it was a lesser included offense of robbery.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www4.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C102744.PDF