Bedford v. State, 957 N.E.2d 336

Bedford filed a Notice of Insanity under R.C. 2949.28 eleven days before his scheduled execution seeking suspension of his death sentence.
The Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas found no probable cause to believe Bedford is insane under the statute.
Bedford appealed, raising two assignments of error presenting issues of first impression in the appellate district.
R.C. 2949.28 defines sanity for competency to be executed as the ability to understand the nature of the death penalty and why it was imposed.
If probable cause to believe insanity exists, a hearing must be held; if not, the matter may be dismissed.
The court affirmed the trial court, ruling there was no probable cause to believe Bedford lacked capacity to understand the death penalty.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred in finding no probable cause Bedford is insane.	Bedford argues probable cause exists to believe insanity.	State contends no probable cause to believe Bedford is insane.	No probable cause; trial court did not abuse discretion.
Whether Bedford is entitled to a hearing under due process without probable cause.	Bedford contends due process requires a hearing once threshold insanity is shown.	State asserts no entitlement to a hearing without probable cause.	No due process entitlement to a hearing absent probable cause.

Panetti v. Quarterman, 551 U.S. 930 (U.S. 2007) (due process requires a fair hearing after substantial threshold insanity showing)
State v. Scott, 92 Ohio St.3d 1 (2001) (no abuse of discretion in finding no probable cause to believe incompetent to be executed)
Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (standard of review and due process considerations in competency determinations)
State v. Deters, 128 Ohio App.3d 329 (1998) (analysis of probable cause in insanity notices and evidentiary standards)
State v. Moore, 90 Ohio St.3d 47 (2000) (discussion of standards governing insanity determinations)