D. D’Intino

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault and related offences.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, had been living independently in the community and demonstrated stability, insight, and medication compliance.

The Board found that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public and granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for violent offences.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and substance abuse disorder.

While the accused had made progress at a residential treatment facility, the hospital and Crown recommended continuing the detention order due to the risk of rapid decompensation if he relapsed or stopped medication.

The Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the existing detention order.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and weapons offences after an unprovoked attack on a correctional officer.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, ongoing auditory hallucinations, and risk of decompensation if medication non-compliant.

The Board ordered a Detention Disposition, maintaining the accused in a high secure forensic unit, finding that a transfer to a medium secure facility was premature given his recent admission and need for further treatment evaluation.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and uttering death threats.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had stabbed his mother during a psychotic episode.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing delusions and marginal capability.

The Board ordered a continued detention disposition with a transfer from a high-secure to a medium-secure forensic facility, prioritizing substance use programming and life skills development.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for two counts of murder, rape, and indecent assault.

The accused, diagnosed with Sexual Sadism, Transvestic Fetishism, and Antisocial Personality Disorder, sought an amendment to his detention disposition to allow an escorted bank visit.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that his disorders are untreatable.

The Board maintained the detention disposition at the secure forensic facility but granted the request for a one-time, staff-escorted bank visit.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges of assault and failing to comply with probation.

The Board accepted uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to major depressive disorder, which renders him unable to communicate with counsel or participate in the court process.

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

Considering the need to protect the public while meeting the accused's needs, the Board ordered a detention disposition with a transfer from a high secure facility to a medium secure hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences in 1993.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel.

The attending psychiatrist testified that the accused remains residually psychotic, lacks insight, and refuses to engage with the treatment team.

Applying the Winko threshold, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order at the high-secure forensic hospital, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

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

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and severe obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The attending psychiatrist testified that the accused requires a high level of support in a secure forensic setting and would likely disengage from treatment and violently reoffend if discharged.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of his detention at the high-secure forensic hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for various offences.

The accused sought an absolute discharge, arguing he no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

The hospital and Crown sought a continued detention order with increased community privileges.

Applying the Winko framework, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat due to his diagnoses of schizophrenia and substance use disorder, and his vulnerability to decompensation without forensic supports.

The Board ordered a continuation of the detention disposition with added privileges for community passes.

The Ontario Review Board held a Restriction of Liberties hearing after the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for several offences, was readmitted to the hospital following a relapse into methamphetamine use.

The hospital notified the Board of the significant increase in the restriction of the accused's liberties.

Based on a joint submission and evidence from the attending psychiatrist, the Board found that the initial and ongoing restriction of liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive option available to manage the increased risk.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, was living in the community under a disposition order.

After being evicted from his group home and temporarily housed in a motel, his mental health decompensated, exacerbated by cannabis use.

The hospital readmitted him, significantly restricting his liberties.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code and found that the initial and ongoing restriction of the accused's liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive option available to manage his risk.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board of a restriction of liberty after the accused, who was detained at the hospital, became agitated and punched a nurse in the face.

The accused was placed in seclusion and restraints, and his privileges were cancelled.

A hearing was held pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was justified, appropriate, and the least restrictive measure available in the circumstances.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board that the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, had absconded and was subsequently transferred to a secure unit.

A Restriction of Liberty hearing was held.

The hospital sought to justify the transfer and requested the removal of a cannabis use exception from the accused's disposition.

The Board found the transfer to the secure unit was necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive measure given the accused's frequent AWOLs and chronic cocaine use.

However, the Board declined to remove the cannabis exception at this time, noting it would not result in an increase of risk to the public.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the disposition for an accused found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1981 and later declared a dangerous offender.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his history of violent and sexual offending, high risk for recidivism, mental health issues, and problematic institutional behavior.

The Board ordered no change to his current disposition, detaining him at Bath Institution and Waypoint Centre, and extended the time before his next hearing to 24 months on consent.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for attempted murder after stabbing the victim over 40 times while experiencing psychosis.

At the initial Ontario Review Board disposition hearing, the Board considered the accused's diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorders, alongside a history of rapid decompensation and aggression when non-compliant with medication.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found the accused poses a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention disposition at the hospital, granting gradual, indirectly supervised community access privileges to support rehabilitation, while imposing a no-contact order and perimeter restrictions regarding the victim.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for two counts of aggravated assault.

The accused, diagnosed with Delusional Disorder, had been compliant with treatment and residing in the community without incident.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to underdeveloped insight into his illness and the index offences.

However, the Board concluded that his risk could be managed in the community and ordered a Conditional Discharge with terms, including medication compliance and abstinence from intoxicants.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual hearing to determine whether the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault, continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The accused suffers from schizoaffective disorder and cannabis use disorder, and recently experienced psychotic symptoms leading to hospital readmissions after consuming cannabis.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing detention order at the secure forensic unit.

The Ontario Review Board held a disposition hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for making false fire alarms and possessing a weapon for a dangerous purpose.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia, cannabis use disorder, and alcohol abuse disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his history of medication non-compliance and substance abuse leading to breakthrough psychosis.

However, given his current stability on injectable antipsychotic medication, the Board concluded that a Conditional Discharge is the least onerous and least restrictive appropriate disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for indecent acts and exposure to a person under 16.

The accused, who has schizophrenia, experienced a recent period of medication non-compliance and decompensation after his pharmacy stopped dispensing his medication.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public, noting his residual psychotic symptoms and the inability of his son to adequately supervise him in the community.

The Board ordered the continuation of the present discharge on conditions, including the requirement to reside at his current supervised lodge.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty of the accused, who had been readmitted to the hospital from the community due to mental decompensation and aggressive behaviour.

The hospital recommended transferring the accused to a facility better suited for longer-term rehabilitation.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was warranted and ordered the accused's transfer to the new facility, maintaining the terms of the previous disposition until the transfer.