Pleading guilty is one of the most consequential decisions a person can make in a criminal case. But what happens if you change your mind before sentencing? In State v. Korsakas, decided May 21, 2026, the Washington Supreme Court addressed a critical question about your right to counsel when withdrawing a guilty plea — and the answer is more nuanced than many defendants expect. The decision matters for anyone facing serious charges in King, Pierce, or Snohomish County who is weighing whether to accept a plea deal.
| What is a Motion to Withdraw a Guilty Plea?
(1) A motion to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing is a critical stage where you have a right to counsel.
(2) Washington courts allow withdrawal only to correct a “manifest injustice” under CrR 4.2(f).
(3) In State v. Korsakas (2026), the Supreme Court held a defendant was not “completely” denied counsel even though his lawyer declined to argue the motion. |
The criminal defense attorneys at Blair & Kim follow Washington appellate decisions closely so our clients understand how shifting case law affects their rights. Below, we break down what the court decided, what it left open, and why the ruling deserves attention from anyone navigating a plea in Washington.
What Happened in State v. Korsakas
Kristopher Korsakas was charged with multiple violations of domestic violence protection orders, domestic violence stalking, first-degree criminal impersonation, and misdemeanor stalking. Near the end of the State’s case at trial, he chose to plead guilty to all counts. The trial judge conducted a thorough colloquy and found the plea knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
At his sentencing hearing roughly six weeks later, Korsakas asked to withdraw that plea, claiming his trial attorney had been ineffective. His lawyer, however, declined to argue the motion, telling the judge it was a “collateral attack” he didn’t normally get involved with. The judge let Korsakas argue the motion himself, found no “manifest injustice,” and denied it. Korsakas was ultimately sentenced to 162 months in prison.
On appeal, Korsakas argued he had been completely denied counsel at a critical stage — an error so serious it would require automatic reversal. The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that because his attorney remained appointed, available, and free of any conflict of interest, Korsakas was not completely denied counsel. The court affirmed the conviction.
A Motion to Withdraw a Guilty Plea Is a “Critical Stage”
One important point the court confirmed: a motion to withdraw a guilty plea made before judgment is entered is a critical stage of a criminal prosecution. Both the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article I, section 22 of the Washington Constitution guarantee the right to a lawyer’s assistance at critical stages of a criminal prosecution. The defense attorney in this case was simply wrong to treat the motion as a “collateral attack” — under CrR 4.2(f), a presentence motion to withdraw is not a collateral attack at all.
So why did the court still affirm? Because the legal standard for “complete denial of counsel” is narrow. Under United States v. Cronic, that kind of automatic-reversal error happens only when a lawyer is totally absent, silenced, or otherwise prevented from helping during a critical stage. Korsakas’s attorney was none of those things — he remained in the courtroom and handled the rest of the sentencing.
| Considering a plea — or having second thoughts about one? The decision to plead guilty has lasting consequences. Before you decide, talk through your options with Blair & Kim’s criminal defense team. |
When Does “Manifest Injustice” Let You Withdraw a Plea?
Washington law does not give defendants an absolute right to take back a guilty plea once a judge has accepted it. Instead, CrR 4.2(f) requires a court to allow withdrawal only when it is necessary to correct a manifest injustice — defined by Washington courts as an injustice that is “obvious, directly observable, overt, not obscure.” The court has long recognized four non-exclusive examples:
- The plea was involuntary;
- The defendant did not ratify the plea;
- The defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the plea; or
- The prosecution failed to honor a plea agreement.
Because a signed plea statement and a careful plea colloquy create a strong — “well nigh irrefutable” — presumption that a plea was voluntary, a defendant who wants to withdraw must point to specific facts strong enough to overcome that presumption. General dissatisfaction is not enough.
The Dissent: Two Justices Would Have Reversed
The decision was not unanimous. In a forceful dissent, Justice Whitener — joined by Justice Gordon McCloud — argued that Korsakas was denied counsel. The dissent emphasized that the trial judge effectively required Korsakas to argue a complex legal motion alone, without warning him that he had a right to a lawyer’s help at that stage and without confirming he wished to give up that right.
In the dissent’s view, physical presence in the courtroom is not the same as the assistance of counsel. The justices would have reversed and sent the case back for a proper hearing. While dissents don’t change the outcome, they often signal arguments that future defendants — and future courts — may revisit.
Notably, the majority did not foreclose a separate claim that the lawyer’s mishandling of the motion was ineffective assistance under Strickland v. Washington — a path a defendant in this situation may still pursue. Because Korsakas did not raise that argument, the court did not decide it, leaving the door open for similar challenges to be framed as ineffective-assistance claims rather than complete-denial-of-counsel claims.
Why This Matters if You’re Facing Domestic Violence or Protection Order Charges
Korsakas was charged with violating domestic violence protection orders and DV stalking — exactly the kind of high-stakes case where the pressure to resolve quickly can be intense. These cases can carry aggravating factors that increase a sentence, as one did here. That makes the decision to plead guilty, and any later effort to undo it, especially significant.
The practical lesson from Korsakas is that the time to get sound advice is before you enter a plea — not after. Once a Washington court accepts a guilty plea, undoing it is difficult. Defendants facing overlapping criminal charges and domestic violence issues benefit from a defense team that understands how a plea in one matter can ripple across related family law and protection order proceedings. Blair & Kim handles both, drawing on decades of combined experience in courts throughout the Seattle metro area, including Bellevue and the surrounding Eastside.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I withdraw a guilty plea in Washington after I’ve entered it?
Sometimes. Before judgment is entered, a court must allow withdrawal under CrR 4.2(f) only if it is necessary to correct a “manifest injustice” — for example, an involuntary plea or ineffective assistance of counsel. You must present specific facts, because a properly entered plea carries a strong presumption that it was voluntary.
Do I have a right to a lawyer when I move to withdraw my plea?
Yes. A presentence motion to withdraw a guilty plea is a “critical stage” of the case, so your constitutional right to counsel applies. As Korsakas shows, however, courts apply a narrow test for whether a defendant was “completely” denied counsel, which is why having an engaged attorney from the start is so important.
What is “manifest injustice”?
Washington courts define manifest injustice as an injustice that is obvious, directly observable, overt, and not obscure. It is a demanding standard, which is why withdrawing a plea is far harder than entering one.
Talk With a Washington Criminal Defense Attorney
If you are facing criminal charges anywhere in King, Pierce, or Snohomish County — or you have questions about your right to counsel when withdrawing a guilty plea — get experienced guidance before making decisions that can follow you for years. The attorneys at Blair & Kim bring former prosecutor experience and a track record across more than 15,000 matters to every case they handle. Contact Blair & Kim today. Call (206) 622-6562 or reach our team online to discuss your situation with a Washington criminal defense attorney.
Seattle Attorneys Blog
