D. Sandor

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder and is currently subject to a detention order.

The hospital and parties jointly submitted that the detention order should be maintained.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his severe delusional disorder and neurocognitive disorder.

The Board ordered that the detention order be maintained on the same terms and conditions while the hospital seeks an appropriate long-term care placement.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle and was subject to a detention disposition.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his bipolar disorder, history of treatment noncompliance, and cannabis use.

However, noting his recent stability, treatment compliance, and lack of active symptoms, the Board concluded that his risk could be adequately managed in the community.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with conditions including treatment compliance, abstention from cannabis, and a requirement to report to the hospital for assessment if directed.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for mischief and an indecent act, was readmitted to the hospital following a decompensation in his mental health triggered by sub-optimal medication and cannabis use.

This readmission constituted a significant increase in the restriction of his liberty, triggering a mandatory hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

The Ontario Review Board found that the hospital's decision to readmit the accused was reasonable, warranted, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive course of action available to manage his risk and stabilize his condition.

The Ontario Review Board held an early review and restriction of liberty hearing for an accused found NCR for child abduction and other offences.

The hospital requested a transfer of the accused's care to the Brockville Mental Health Centre and the removal of community living passes, citing her lack of progress, rule-breaking, and antisocial personality disorder.

The Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and approved the transfer to Brockville, noting it offered better programming and a graduated privilege structure.

However, the Board declined to remove the community living passes, finding the disposition did not need to be more restrictive.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences including attempted murder.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been stable on long-acting injectable medication and was transitioning to live with his parents, who were the victims of the index offences.

While the treating psychiatrist and all parties recommended a conditional discharge, the majority of the Board concluded that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and that a detention order was the necessary and appropriate disposition to ensure rapid readmission if his mental health decompensated.

A minority would have granted a conditional discharge.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and other offences, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his bipolar disorder and history of substance use.

However, noting his recent stability on Lithium and abstention from cannabis, the Board ordered a conditional discharge.

The Board declined to impose a mandatory treatment condition, finding it unnecessary given the accused's current insight and voluntary compliance with his medication regimen.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for killing or injuring animals, breach of probation, and criminal harassment.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his major mental illness and history of substance use.

However, noting his sustained progress, insight, and abstinence from substances, the Board accepted a joint submission and granted a conditional discharge.

With the accused's consent, the Board also imposed a treatment order under s. 672.55(1) of the Criminal Code to ensure continued medication compliance during his transition to independent living.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for various offences.

The accused, who suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia and has a history of substance abuse, did not attend the hearing.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing delusions, lack of insight, and a high likelihood of medication non-adherence and substance relapse if discharged.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for criminal harassment.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizoaffective Disorder and a mild intellectual disability, had shown some improvement on medication but continued to experience persistent delusions and boundary issues.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and required the intensive support and supervision of a hospital setting.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for violent offences and diagnosed with schizophrenia and substance use disorders, eloped from the hospital and used substances.

Upon his return, the hospital restricted his community privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to review the restriction of liberty.

The Board found that both the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty were justified, necessary, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive options available to ensure public safety while the accused's medications were optimized and his progress monitored.

The Hospital sought an early review of the accused's conditional discharge, citing medication non-compliance and disengagement from treatment.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for harassment, had reduced his antipsychotic medication and stopped attending required hospital appointments.

The Ontario Review Board found that the accused continued to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board concluded that a conditional discharge was no longer sufficient to manage the risk and ordered a detention disposition.

However, the Board declined the Hospital's request to transfer the accused to a facility in Brockville, finding that maintaining his connection to the Ottawa community was appropriate unless further deterioration occurred.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible (NCR) for criminal harassment.

The accused had previously been found NCR for similar offences against the same victim and was subject to a Detention Order.

While on a conditional release, he breached non-communication orders and traveled to the victim's city, leading to the new charges.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing erotomanic delusions, marginal insight, and active cannabis use.

The Board ordered a Detention Order mirroring his previous disposition.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review hearing.

The hospital and the accused's counsel submitted that he no longer posed a significant threat to public safety, a position ultimately adopted by the Attorney General.

The Board found that the accused had made sustained progress, was stabilized on medication, and had not acted violently in years.

Applying the Winko threshold, the Board concluded the accused no longer posed a significant threat and ordered an absolute discharge.

Ryan G. Gorman, previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and other offences, underwent his annual review hearing before the Ontario Review Board.

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

The Attorney General opposed, citing recent stressors, increased cannabis use, and non-compliance with residence conditions.

The Board found that the accused's recent behaviour mirrored his pre-index offence conduct, demonstrating partial insight and fragility in protective factors.

The Board concluded he continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered a continued conditional discharge.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for harassment and public mischief offences stemming from persistent delusional complaints against a police officer.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board found that the accused, who suffers from untreated schizophrenia and lacks insight, poses a significant threat to public safety due to the risk of continued psychological harm to others.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre to facilitate assessment of his capacity to consent to treatment and to manage his risk, with privileges to reside in the community once approved.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on breach of probation charges.

The hospital and Crown argued the accused remained permanently unfit and posed a significant threat to public safety, necessitating continued supervision.

The accused's counsel conceded permanent unfitness but argued the significant threat threshold was no longer met due to years of stability at a supervised group home.

The Board agreed with the accused, finding that while he remains permanently unfit due to a neurocognitive disorder, the risk of serious harm is speculative given his prolonged lack of aggression, medication compliance, and the ongoing authority of his wife as substitute decision-maker.

The Board concluded the accused does not pose a significant threat and remitted the matter to the court to consider a stay of proceedings.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's conditional discharge.

The accused had been found not criminally responsible for assault.

Relying on the uncontroverted expert evidence of the hospital's most responsible physician, the Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to treatment-refractory schizophrenia, a history of substance use, and limited insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge without adding the travel restrictions proposed by the hospital and the Crown, finding them unnecessary given the accused's compliance and therapeutic alliance.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for harassment and public mischief offences.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing.

Based on the uncontroverted expert evidence of the assessing psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and is currently untreated, poses a significant threat to public safety due to a risk of causing serious psychological harm.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre with conditions, including a prohibition on internet access without approval, to allow for assessment of capacity to consent to treatment and management of his risk.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for two counts of arson.

At the initial hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the Board considered whether the accused represented a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board found that the accused's major mental illness, history of noncompliance with treatment, and ongoing substance use posed a significant threat of serious criminality.

The Board concluded that a detention disposition was necessary and appropriate to manage the risk, allowing the hospital to respond quickly to any return of psychotic symptoms.

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

The accused has a history of schizoaffective disorder, substance use, and violence.

While he made recent progress in the hospital setting, he continues to lack insight into his illness and the impact of substance use.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the evidence of the treating psychiatrist, finding that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

A detention disposition was ordered as necessary and appropriate to manage his risk.