State v. Hix
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtDouglas, J.
This cause raises a single issue. Does R.C. 2945.39 mandate that a defendant who pleads not guilty by reason of insanity be provided with an independent examiner of his choice to determine defendant’s sanity? For the following reasons, we find that a defendant has no such automatic entitlement.
R.C. 2945.39 provides in pertinent part:
“(A) If a defendant enters a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity, the court may order one or more, but not more than three, evaluations of the defendant’s mental condition at the time of the commission of the offense.
“(3) * * * If more than one examination is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Ross v. MoffittSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Provident Bank v. WoodOhio Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. SingerOhio Supreme Court · 1977
- Youngstown Club v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1970
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. HillOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- De Freece v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993
- McWilliams v. DunnSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
- State v. HillOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. SainiOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.