G. Nexhipi

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson and assault causing bodily harm.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered whether the accused posed a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found that the accused's schizophrenia, substance use disorder, limited insight, and uncertain housing situation contributed to a moderate risk of violent re-offending.

The Board concluded that the accused represents a significant threat and ordered a Detention Order with conditions, permitting community living in approved accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault and assault with intent to resist arrest.

The accused has treatment-resistant schizophrenia and a major neurocognitive disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to the brittle nature of his illness and limited insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention disposition at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, but removed the abstinence and urine drug screening conditions and reduced the minimum reporting frequency, given his stability and lack of substance use history.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the conditional discharge of an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The accused sought an absolute discharge, arguing he had been stable in the community for years without violence.

The hospital and Crown sought a continuation of the conditional discharge, presenting psychiatric evidence that the accused's stability relied entirely on externally mandated medication, without which his severe persecutory delusions would return and escalate his risk of violence.

The Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for offences including uttering death threats, assault, and possession of a prohibited weapon.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his schizoaffective disorder, substance use disorder, lack of insight, and non-compliance with oral medications.

The Board ordered a continuation of the Detention Disposition at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, concluding that an Absolute or Conditional Discharge would not adequately manage the risk of psychiatric decompensation and potential violence.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for four counts of attempted murder and assault.

The accused's diagnoses include schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing psychotic symptoms and the risk of substance use relapse.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Disposition with community living privileges.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for attempted murder and other offences.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused all agreed that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and that a continuation of the Detention Order was necessary and appropriate.

The Board accepted the joint position, noting the accused's progress and compliance with treatment, and ordered the continuation of the Detention Order on a General Forensic Unit with provisions for travel passes.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found unfit to stand trial on weapons charges.

The accused's treating physician testified that despite treatment with clozapine, the accused remains unable to discuss the consequences of a trial.

The Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial and ordered the continuation of a Detention Order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health with privileges to live in the community in approved accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of the accused's liberty after she was readmitted to the hospital following a positive urine drug screen for amphetamines.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly agreed that the initial restriction of liberty was necessary and appropriate.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was significant, necessary, and appropriate for public safety, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure at the time it was imposed.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder, was living in the community under an Ontario Review Board disposition.

After missing doses of his antipsychotic medication due to paranoia, he was readmitted to the hospital for safe re-titration, resulting in a restriction of his liberty.

The hospital notified the Board, which held a mandatory review hearing.

The Board found that the initial restriction of liberty and its continuation were warranted, necessary, appropriate, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure in the circumstances.

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

The accused sought an absolute discharge, while the hospital and Crown sought a continuation of the detention disposition.

Despite recent stability in a high-support community residence, the Board found the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of medication non-compliance, substance use, and sexually inappropriate behaviour.

The Board concluded that the current detention disposition remains necessary and appropriate to manage his risk and ensure ongoing psychiatric support.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for offences including possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose and assault police.

The accused, diagnosed with bipolar affective disorder, had transitioned to supportive community housing and remained stable and compliant with medication over the past year.

While all parties agreed the accused remained a significant threat to public safety, the accused sought a conditional discharge.

The Board concluded a detention disposition remained necessary to ensure adequate oversight, particularly regarding housing approvals and the ability to intervene early if his mental state deteriorated.

The Board varied the disposition to allow up to 14 days of indirectly supervised travel within Ontario and reduced his reporting frequency to once every two weeks.

Jason McCalmon, previously found not criminally responsible for weapons and assault charges, underwent a mandatory annual review of his disposition by the Ontario Review Board.

The Board found that he continues to suffer from schizophrenia and lacks insight into his illness, thereby remaining a significant threat to public safety.

However, noting his positive progress and compliance with medication over the past year, the Board ordered a continuation of his Conditional Discharge with a relaxed reporting requirement of once every two weeks.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for robbery, theft of a motor vehicle, and assault causing bodily harm.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder in remission, had been living in supportive housing and complying with his treatment.

The hospital and the accused sought an absolute discharge, while the Crown opposed it.

Relying on the expert evidence of the treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused's insight had improved and that protective factors, including a Community Treatment Order and an Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) team, mitigated his risk.

The Board concluded the accused no longer represented a significant threat to public safety and granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon due to schizophrenia.

The Board heard uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his treatment-refractory schizophrenia and risk of decompensation.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with privileges up to community living and new travel privileges within Canada for up to seven days.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, continues to experience violent auditory hallucinations and lacks insight into his illness, believing his symptoms are caused by medication.

The Board accepted the treating psychiatrist's evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a continued Detention Disposition at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, denying the accused's request to reduce reporting requirements and removing a previous privilege for indirectly supervised travel.

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

The accused had a history of polysubstance abuse resulting in psychotic symptoms.

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly submitted that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety but supported expanding his privileges to allow travel for employment as a roofer and for family visits.

The Board adopted the expert evidence, found the accused remained a significant threat, and ordered a continued Detention Order with the requested expanded travel privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for indecent acts and sexual assault.

The accused's diagnoses included bipolar disorder and cannabis use disorder.

The Board found that the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety due to the risk of relapse in the context of medication non-adherence or substance use.

However, noting the accused's recent stability, adherence to treatment, and successful transition to community living, the Board concluded that a conditional discharge was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage the risk.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had disengaged from rehabilitative programming and exhibited psychiatric instability.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his severe mental illness, lack of insight, and risk of medication non-compliance.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a detention order at the hospital with privileges up to living in the community in approved accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found unfit to stand trial on sexual assault and sexual interference charges.

The accused suffers from expressive aphasia following a stroke.

The Board determined that the accused remains unfit to stand trial, as his communication limitations prevent him from instructing counsel in a complex trial.

The Board ordered his continued detention at the hospital with privileges up to living in the community, adding new conditions prohibiting attendance at places where children are present and requiring abstinence from psychoactive substances and alcohol.

During an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible, the accused requested an independent assessment to help establish parameters for managing his transition out of long-term seclusion.

The accused had been in seclusion for over six years due to treatment-resistant schizophrenia and a refusal to take oral medications.

The Ontario Review Board ordered a single independent assessment pursuant to s. 672.121(b) of the Criminal Code to identify more effective treatment and management strategies to assist the Board in making a disposition.