A plea of guilty or no contest in court must be made knowingly and voluntarily. The accused person must understand the trial rights he is giving up by making the plea and the consequences he will face a result. He must also agree that he is entering the plea voluntarily, and that no one is forcing him or making him improper promises. Even after a plea is accepted by the court, the defendant retains a limited right to withdraw his plea. If a defendant chooses to withdraw his plea before he is sentenced, he must only show there is “good cause” to withdraw his plea.
In a recent case, State v. Freeman, the Kansas Supreme Court discusses what constitutes “good cause.” Nos. 100,792, 100,793, slip. op. at 2. Mr. Freeman pleaded guilty in district court based on the advice of both the prosecutor and defense attorney, who agreed on his criminal history and told him he could expect a sentence of 71 months in jail. However, Mr. Freeman later learned that both the prosecutor and defense attorney had made a mistake–his criminal history was worse than he was told and he instead would face 120 months in jail. As a result, he sought to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing. He argued “good cause” existed because he “was misled by his counsel and the State in accepting the plea deal due to their mistaken belief that his presumptive sentence was 71 months.” Id. at 5. The lower courts denied his request to withdraw his plea.
However, on appeal, the Kansas Supreme Court reverses the lower courts. In reviewing whether “good cause” has been shown, the court considers three factors:
(1) whether the defendant was represented by competent counsel, (2) whether the defendant was misled, coerced, mistreated, or unfairly taken advantage of, and (3) whether the plea was fairly and understandingly made. Id. at 6 (citing State v. Aguilar, 290 Kan. 506, 511, 231 P.3d 563 (2010) (collecting cases discussing the Edgar factors)).
Here, the court agrees that a defendant cannot show “good cause” simply by claiming the prosecutor and defense attorney made a mutual mistake about his criminal history score. Yet, the court holds the district court judge “abused his discretion because he failed to ‘consider the circumstances giving rise to the mutual mistake’ and their effect on the ‘factors applicable to the existence of good cause to withdraw a plea.’” Id. at 8 (citing State v. Schow, 287 Kan. 529, 541, 546 (2008)). The judge should have considered the facts of the cases and looked at the relevant factors. Because he did not, the court remands the case back to the district court to apply the correct legal standards to see if Mr. Freeman established “good cause” to withdraw a plea.
Before a person enters into a plea, he or she should understand all of the consequences of a conviction. At Bell Folsom, P.A., our attorneys run a thorough check of our clients’ history to make sure there are no surprises. To speak to an attorney today, contact Bell Folsom, P.A.