State v. Flint, 2015 Ohio 3689

Timothy Flint was indicted for felonious assault; he initially pled not guilty and later timely entered (and later withdrew) a written plea of not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI).
Defense counsel requested competency and insanity evaluations after receiving writings allegedly showing hallucinations; the court ordered a single evaluation by the Forensic Psychiatry Center for Western Ohio (Dr. De Marchis).
Dr. De Marchis concluded Flint was competent to stand trial and found no evidence of serious mental illness; the court accepted that report and found Flint competent.
Flint later sought a second independent psychiatric evaluation and asserted the court was required to inform him of his right to an independent evaluation at public expense under R.C. 2945.371(B).
The trial court denied the second-evaluation motion; Flint withdrew his NGRI plea and entered a guilty plea pursuant to a plea agreement, receiving an agreed four-year sentence.
On appeal Flint argued the court erred by failing to inform him of the right to an independent evaluation at public expense; the appellate court affirmed on waiver grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court was required to inform Flint of his statutory right to an independent expert evaluation at public expense under R.C. 2945.371(B) after Flint entered an NGRI plea	State: the requirement in R.C. 2945.371(B) applies only when the court orders more than one evaluation or designates an examiner other than one recommended by the defendant	Flint: court ordered a single evaluation without a defendant-recommended examiner and therefore was required to inform him of his right to an independent evaluation at public expense	Court held Flint waived any right to an independent evaluation by withdrawing the NGRI plea and pleading guilty; no reversible error.
Whether issues about competency or sanity survived Flint’s withdrawal of the NGRI plea and his guilty plea	State: withdrawal of NGRI and guilty plea operate as implied admission of sanity and waive competency/sanity challenges	Flint: sought second evaluation even after withdrawal, arguing report missed traumatic history and hallucinations	Court held withdrawal of NGRI and guilty plea waived the issue; plea implies sanity and waives related challenges.

Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960) (establishes competency standard: ability to consult with counsel with rational understanding and factual understanding of proceedings)
State v. Fore, 18 Ohio App.2d 264, 248 N.E.2d 633 (1969) (acceptance of a guilty plea constitutes an implied admission of sanity)