State v. Garcia, 283 P.3d 165

Garcia was charged with attempted second-degree murder and intentional aggravated battery; plea bargain reduced the aggravated battery to level 5, and second charge was dismissed.
Garcia pled nolo contendere to reckless aggravated battery; a PSI later showed a criminal history score of B, increasing the presumptive sentence.
Garcia obtained new counsel and moved to withdraw the plea before sentencing on grounds of manifest injustice/good cause.
The district court cited Ford and conducted a three-factor (Edgar) analysis, denying withdrawal; Garcia was sentenced to 128 months.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed, but Garcia challenged the use of Ford and the adequacy of the Edgar analysis; this Court granted review.
The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new hearing applying correct standards, noting Ford’s innocence requirement had been disapproved and Schow/Vasquez guidance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Ford’s innocence prerequisite controlled the ruling	Garcia argues Ford misapplied; innocence not required	State argues Ford guided the Edgar factors	Remand for new hearing; Ford innocence not required
Whether mutual mistake about criminal history can support good cause	Garcia contends mutual mistake on history score supports good cause	State contends Edgar factors suffice and mutual mistake not automatic	Remand to apply correct standards under Edgar/Schow

State v. Schow, 287 Kan. 529 (2008) (mutual mistake as to criminal history may implicate Edgar factors; good cause framework clarified)
State v. Vasquez, 272 Kan. 692 (2001) (innocence allegation not required for presentencing plea withdrawal)
State v. Ford, 23 Kan. App. 2d 248 (1996) (innocence prerequisite previously claimed but disapproved later)
State v. Aguilar, 290 Kan. 506 (2010) (good cause standard is flexible; Edgar factors not exclusive)
State v. Edgar, 281 Kan. 30 (2006) (Edgar three-factor framework for good cause to withdraw plea)