The Kentucky Court of Appeals has reversed a Daviess Circuit Court’s decision to enforce a plea agreement that prosecutors tried to withdraw in the case against Keith L. Bryant, who was initially indicted for murder for a 2022 fatal shooting. The ruling allows the Commonwealth to proceed with the original charges despite previously reaching a plea deal with Bryant.
The Court of Appeals issued a 15-page unanimous ruling on February 28, 2025.
Bryant, now 36, was charged with murder for the October 6, 2022, shooting death of 42-year-old Christopher Green. Bryant was set to face trial in Daviess Circuit Court in October 2023. Court documents show that leading up to the trial, the Commonwealth engaged in plea negotiations, initially offering to amend the murder charge to second-degree manslaughter with a recommended 10-year prison sentence. That offer was later withdrawn due to objections from members of the victim’s family, documents show.
Court documents show a revised offer was then presented, reducing the murder charge to first-degree manslaughter with the same 10-year sentence recommendation. However, records show that Bryant rejected this offer and countered with a plea of second-degree manslaughter with a 5-year sentence, which the Commonwealth declined.
On October 3, 2023 — one day before a scheduled motions hearing — the Commonwealth issued a new offer, this time for Bryant to plead guilty to second-degree manslaughter with an 8-year sentence. Records show Bryant accepted that deal on October 4, and both sides signed formal plea agreement documents.
However, before the agreement could be entered into court, the Commonwealth again withdrew its offer, citing objections from the victim’s family.
“When the Commonwealth withdrew its consent, Bryant had not yet pleaded guilty so, of course, the trial court had not formally accepted Bryant’s guilty plea,” the Court of Appeals ruling reads.
Bryant then filed a motion to enforce the plea agreement, arguing that it was legally binding once both parties signed it. The Daviess Circuit Court ruled in Bryant’s favor.
“In a thorough, well-written decision, the trial court granted Bryant’s motion, emphasizing fundamental fairness and the negative impact on society when the government reneges on an agreement without good cause. The trial court relied on our Supreme Court’s lofty rhetoric about the necessity of prosecutorial integrity,” the Court of Appeals wrote.
The Commonwealth appealed the Daviess Circuit Court ruling, and the Kentucky Court of Appeals ruled that the plea deal was not legally binding because Bryant had not formally entered a guilty plea in court before the Commonwealth withdrew its offer.
“Of course, that is not Bryant’s fault since the Commonwealth retracted the agreement quite soon after Bryant agreed to its terms. Regardless of the reason(s), Bryant had not accepted the plea agreement by pleading guilty,” the Court of Appeals wrote. “… Consequently, we must reject Bryant’s argument that he accepted the plea offer once he and the Commonwealth reached an accord on its terms and signed the plea documents. Precedent firmly, repeatedly holds that the defendant’s plea in open court, and the trial court’s acceptance thereof, denotes when a defendant has accepted a plea offer.”
The Court of Appeals further noted that Bryant had not demonstrated any detrimental reliance on the plea agreement, such as waiving certain rights or providing testimony based on the deal.
“Though he vaguely raises detrimental reliance, Bryant does not cite to specific acts he took, or declined to take, in reliance upon the plea,” the Court of Appeals wrote.
Lastly, the Court of Appeals said that Bryant raised the possibility of the agreement being an option contract, which the ruling defined as “a unilateral contract which binds the optionee to do nothing, but grants the optionee the right to accept or reject the offer in accordance with its terms within the time and in the manner specified in the option. Thus, the optionee has the open discretion to take or to leave the proposal.”
The Court ruled there was no evidence the Commonwealth had agreed to keep the offer open for a fixed period and therefore said no option contract had been formed.
While the Court of Appeals acknowledged the unfairness of the situation, it concluded that current Kentucky law does not allow for enforcement of a withdrawn plea agreement unless the defendant has formally entered a plea before the court.
“We must reluctantly reverse the trial court’s contrary decision,” the Court of Appeals wrote. “However, that result arguably fails to align with the fundamental principles of justice and fair play which are the foundation of our criminal justice system.”
The Court also wrote, “Though, in the broadest sense, a defendant in Bryant’s situation is no worse off after the Commonwealth’s retraction of its offer than before, we are confident that no one would wish to be treated as Bryant was here.”
The Court’s ruling also used a footnote to emphasize that a victim’s family does not have veto power over plea agreements. The court further criticized the repeated withdrawals of plea offers, warning that such actions undermine public trust in the justice system. In another footnote, the opinion cited a previous case, writing, “If the government breaks its word, it breeds contempt for integrity and good faith.”
With the appellate ruling, the murder charges against Bryant remain active, and the case was remanded for further proceedings in Daviess Circuit Court. The ruling clears the way for trial or further plea negotiations, but the previously withdrawn plea agreement will not be enforced.
The court ruling says Bryant is currently proceeding without legal representation, as his attorney withdrew following the submission of appellate briefs. Online records show that Bryant is currently being held at the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex.
