A. D. Jones

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to reconsider the accused's fitness to stand trial, following a remand from the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The accused, who has an intellectual developmental disorder, had previously been found unfit.

Based on updated psychiatric assessments and applying the Supreme Court of Canada's recent framework in Bharwani, the Board accepted the joint submission that the accused is now fit to stand trial.

The Board found that the accused has a reality-based understanding of the trial process and can meaningfully participate with appropriate court accommodations.

The accused was referred back to the court for next steps.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on charges of mischief and failure to comply.

The accused suffers from major neurocognitive disorder (dementia) and alcohol use disorder.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, supported by psychiatric evidence, that the accused is permanently unfit to stand trial due to progressive cognitive decline.

Furthermore, the Board found that the accused no longer represents a significant threat to the safety of the public, as his risk of violence is low and can be managed under the Mental Health Act.

The Board ordered that the accused be referred back to the court for a recommended stay of proceedings.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the accused's disposition.

The accused had been found not criminally responsible for offences including assaulting a peace officer causing bodily harm.

The Board found that the accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a Detention Order, but expanded his privileges to include 36-hour community passes and the opportunity for supervised community living, as jointly recommended by the parties.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for arson.

The accused, diagnosed with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, had stopped taking antipsychotic medication and exhibited ongoing paranoia and imperfect insight.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to a substantial risk of decompensation.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge, but reduced reporting requirements and removed the submit samples and consent to treatment clauses, representing the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for assault and mischief.

The accused, who was self-represented, chose not to attend the hearing.

The Board proceeded in his absence, noting the appointment of amicus curiae to safeguard his interests.

Relying on psychiatric evidence that the accused suffers from schizophrenia, lacks insight, and poses a moderate risk of future violence, the Board found he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention at the forensic psychiatric hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for assault and breach of probation.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had made significant progress in community reintegration but remained vulnerable to stressors.

Based on expert psychiatric evidence and a joint submission from all parties, the Board found the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with terms requiring the accused to reside at a specific supportive housing location and report to the hospital as required.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been residing in a transitional supportive housing program and making slow progress toward independent living.

The treating psychiatrist testified that the accused continues to pose a notable risk to public safety if left unsupervised, due to a history of medication non-adherence and symptom relapse.

The Board unanimously accepted the psychiatric evidence, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention disposition, concluding it was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage the risk.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm and assault.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and pedophilia, had made positive progress in a supervised group home and remained abstinent from substances.

However, due to his partial insight and need for external supervision to maintain medication compliance, the Board found he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of his conditional discharge but removed the substance abstention clause to test his ability to remain abstinent without extrinsic legal support.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for criminal harassment, failure to comply with a release order, and uttering threats.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board found that the accused, who suffers from bipolar disorder and a substance use disorder, continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered a detention disposition at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care, with conditions including a weapons prohibition, abstention from intoxicants, and no-contact provisions regarding the victim and their child.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder and assault.

The accused had been residing in a long-term care home and demonstrated significant stability with the support of a geriatric psychiatry team and a community treatment order.

The Board accepted the joint submission and uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused's risk of harm was minimal and diminishing.

Finding that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public, the Board granted an absolute discharge.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for attempted murder and possession of a prohibited weapon.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board found that the accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and substance use disorder, remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention disposition at the forensic hospital with specific privileges and conditions, including a prohibition on weapons and substances, and directed the preparation of a Gladue Report.

The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including assault and resisting arrest.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review her fitness and determine the appropriate disposition.

Based on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to severe intellectual disability and schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

The Board ordered a detention disposition with privileges, finding she requires a highly structured 24/7 supervised setting to manage her complex needs and mitigate the high risk of violent reoffending.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder due to schizophrenia.

The Board heard evidence from the treating psychiatric team that the accused has made progress but remains stress-vulnerable and requires ongoing medication optimization.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

A detention disposition was ordered, allowing for gradual reintegration into the community through supervised passes and potential group home placement, subject to strict monitoring and geographic restrictions.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on various charges including sexual assault and criminal harassment.

The accused suffers from Major Neurocognitive Disorder secondary to Adrenoleukodystrophy, resulting in progressive cognitive and physical deterioration.

The Board accepted expert evidence that the accused remains unfit to stand trial and poses a significant threat to public safety due to impulsive and sexually aggressive behaviours.

The Board ordered a continued detention disposition at the forensic hospital, with a reduction in reporting requirements, while noting that long-term care would be a more appropriate placement once substitute decision-maker issues are resolved.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for theft under $5000.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and cognitive deficits, had been residing in a locked long-term care unit and demonstrated significant stability and compliance with treatment.

The treatment team, the hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly recommended an absolute discharge.

Applying the test from Winko, the Board concluded that the accused no longer poses a significant threat to the safety of the public and granted an absolute discharge.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson and appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his schizophrenia, substance use disorder, and history of decompensation linked to cannabis use.

The Board concluded that a conditional discharge was insufficient to manage the risk and ordered a detention disposition with conditions, including a prohibition on cannabis use and a requirement to report four times per month.

The accused was found unfit to stand trial on charges including failure to comply with a probation order and release orders.

The matter was remitted to the Ontario Review Board.

The Board heard psychiatric evidence that the accused suffers from Huntington's Disease, resulting in severe cognitive decline, delusions, and psychosis.

Applying the fitness test from R. v. Bharwani, the Board concluded the accused lacked a reality-based understanding of the proceedings and could not meaningfully instruct counsel.

The Board ordered a detention disposition with privileges for community living in approved accommodation, prioritizing public safety and the accused's need for supervised care.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for break and enter a dwelling house and the matter was remitted to the Ontario Review Board for a disposition hearing.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, and continues to experience delusions similar to those that precipitated the index offence.

The Board found that the accused poses a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his lack of insight, history of treatment non-adherence, and risk of environmental violence.

The Board ordered a detention disposition with conditions, including hospital approval of accommodation, as the least onerous and restrictive disposition necessary to manage the risk.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and an indecent act.

The hospital and the Attorney General supported an absolute discharge.

Relying on uncontroverted psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's risk to public safety was well-managed by his placement in a long-term care facility, a Community Treatment Order, and his declining physical health.

Concluding that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public, the Board ordered an absolute discharge.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and was subject to a conditional discharge.

At the annual review hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered whether the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

Based on evidence from the attending psychiatrist that the accused's mental illness was well-managed, he was compliant with treatment, and he had successfully transitioned to independent living with community supports, the Board concluded the accused no longer posed a significant threat.

The Board ordered an absolute discharge.