Bryan Kohberger’s bid to take back his guilty plea in the University of Idaho murder case is expected to be a steep challenge, a legal expert says.
Kohberger pleaded guilty in 2025 to the killings of four University of Idaho students: Kaylee Goncalves, Madison Mogen, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin. Under the terms of that agreement, he was spared the death penalty and received a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
But after signaling that he wants to undo the plea, Kohberger appears to have only narrow legal avenues remaining, former federal prosecutor and West Coast Trial Lawyers President Neama Rahmani exclusively told Oxygen.
“The time for Bryan Kohberger to appeal a sentence has run,” said Rahmani, who is not connected to the case. “All he can do is collaterally attack his guilty plea and conviction by” alleging that his constitutional rights were violated.
Rahmani said a defendant cannot withdraw a guilty plea simply because he has had second thoughts. To succeed, Kohberger would need to persuade a judge that a significant legal defect affected the plea process.
Potential arguments could include a claim that Kohberger did not knowingly enter the plea, that he is actually innocent, that prosecutors failed to turn over crucial evidence or that his defense attorneys provided ineffective representation, Rahmani explained.
In Rahmani’s view, only the allegations involving withheld evidence or ineffective assistance of counsel are likely to present any plausible basis for argument.
Rahmani pointed to reports that one victim was found with another person’s hair in her hand — a detail cited in Kohberger’s new petition and first reported by the New York Times.
“If prosecutors failed to turn over that potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense,” Rahmani said, “It could form the basis of a constitutional challenge. Likewise, if Kohberger’s attorneys knew about the evidence but failed to tell him before he pleaded guilty, the defense could argue he received ineffective assistance of counsel.”
“If you’re a prosecutor, you have to disclose any exculpatory evidence. That’s called Brady material under a famous Supreme Court case. So obviously a victim having someone else’s hair in their hand, that’s potentially exculpatory,” Rahmani explained. “So if the prosecution didn’t disclose it, that’s a potential violation and a grounds for him to withdraw his plea.”
Rahmani also added, ”If Bryan Kohberger’s lawyers knew about this hair and didn’t disclose it to their client and he pleaded guilty as a result. Maybe, just maybe the judge would unwind the plea. But that would require (his) defense team to actually concede that in open court or in a declaration that they knew about the evidence and didn’t tell their client.”
Oxygen has reached out to Kohberger’s former legal team for comment.
31-year-old Kohberger continued to assert his “absolute claim of innocence” in a prison phone call with the New York Times, marking the first time that he’s publicly spoken about the murders since his 2022 arrest.
The former doctoral student refused to discuss the evidence in the case or provide any additional details about his new claims.
Oxygen reached to Latah County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson about Kohberger’s recent claims, but did not receive an immediate reply.
Still, Rahmani emphasized that judges rarely allow defendants to withdraw guilty pleas.
“It’s not uncommon for criminal defendants to want to withdraw their plea,” he said. “It’s very uncommon for it to be granted.”
Even if Kohberger were successful, Rahmani noted that prosecutors could once again seek the death penalty because the protections of his plea agreement would no longer apply.
As Rahmani said, “I think there’s almost no world where Bryan Kohberger walks free.”
