J. Fuller

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board that the accused, who was subject to a disposition ordering his detention, had been placed in seclusion for a period exceeding seven days following an incident where he attempted to punch a staff member.

The Board convened a hearing to review the restriction of liberty.

The Board found that both the initial restriction and the continuing restriction until his discharge from seclusion were necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive options available to the hospital given the accused's history of assaultive behaviour, increase in symptoms, and refusal to accept medication.

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

The accused, diagnosed with delusional disorder, had recently transitioned to supported community living and was making positive progress.

However, he continued to have limited insight into his illness and residual delusional beliefs.

Applying the Winko test, the Board accepted the joint submission of the parties that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current Detention Order without amendment.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and referred to the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing.

The Board found that the accused, who is diagnosed with schizophrenia and sedative use disorder, continues to experience perceptual disturbances and lacks community support.

The Board concluded that the accused poses a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered a detention order at the hospital with specific privileges and prohibitions, including abstention from intoxicants and a weapons prohibition.

The Ontario Review Board convened to review the restriction of liberties imposed on an accused found not criminally responsible (NCR) for arson.

The hospital had restricted the accused's liberties on two occasions due to ongoing substance use, emotional dysregulation, and a violation of privilege levels.

Applying the Campbell framework, the Board found that the restrictions significantly increased the restriction on the accused's liberty.

However, the Board concluded that the restrictions were necessary, appropriate, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measures to protect public safety while the accused underwent medication changes.

The accused was found unfit to stand trial on charges of an indecent act and failing to comply with probation.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing.

Based on the evidence of the attending psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused lacks a reality-based understanding of the court process due to schizoaffective disorder and remains unfit to stand trial.

The Board ordered a Detention Order with gradual privileges, finding it to be the least onerous and restrictive disposition necessary to protect the public while providing treatment.

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

The hospital and the Attorney General sought a renewal of the detention disposition with an amendment to allow community living in Southeastern Ontario.

The majority of the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to persistent delusions, risk of decompensation without medication oversight, and entrenched racist and homophobic beliefs.

The Board ordered a continued detention disposition with the recommended amendment to facilitate a 24/7 supervised community placement.

A dissenting minority would have granted an absolute discharge, finding insufficient current evidence of a significant threat.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the hospital's decision to significantly restrict the liberty of an NCR patient by placing him in seclusion with physical restraints.

The patient, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, had violently assaulted staff when they attempted to administer prescribed injectable medication.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was a serious deprivation but was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous measure available given the extreme risk of violence to staff and the patient's ongoing psychosis.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for uttering threats and criminal harassment.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had made significant progress in his treatment and rehabilitation at the Brockville Mental Health Centre.

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

However, balancing public safety with the accused's needs under s. 672.54 of the Criminal Code, the Board determined that a conditional discharge was the necessary and appropriate disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a Restriction of Liberty hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible.

The accused had lost his community housing due to repeated rule infractions and was readmitted to the hospital.

The Board accepted a joint submission that the restriction of liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous measure available given the accused's homelessness and need for supervision.

The current disposition was maintained.

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

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for various offences, had experienced multiple rapid decompensations and hospitalizations over the past year linked to cannabis use and medication non-compliance.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight and rapid decompensation.

The Board ordered that a Detention Order is the least onerous and restrictive disposition necessary to manage his risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for firearms offences.

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar Mood Disorder and substance use disorders, had made significant progress over the past year, including building a relationship of trust with his treatment team and maintaining sobriety.

However, the Board found that he continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to the risk of relapse and subsequent manic episodes.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention order with conditions allowing him to travel and reside in the community, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and appeared before the Ontario Review Board for a disposition hearing.

The Board heard evidence from the hospital's forensic psychiatrist, who suggested an absolute or conditional discharge.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his fluctuating bipolar disorder, lack of community supports, and need for psychological counselling.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge to ensure adequate oversight and treatment.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for arson and weapons offences due to schizophrenia.

The hospital recommended a conditional discharge, noting the accused's compliance with treatment and stable independent living, despite some concerns regarding substance use and new weapons charges.

The Board found the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but concluded that a conditional discharge, with close monitoring, is the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on a charge of sexual assault.

Applying the fitness test from Bharwani, the Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to a moderate intellectual disability.

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

The Board ordered a continued Detention Disposition at the secure forensic unit, noting recent progress toward a potential community placement.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and was detained in a secure forensic unit.

At an early review hearing, the hospital recommended a conditional discharge, while the Attorney-General sought continued detention.

The Ontario Review Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, specifically a risk of psychological harm.

However, relying on psychiatric evidence that the accused's risk is low and manageable in the community with medication compliance, the Board concluded that a conditional discharge is the necessary and appropriate disposition.

The accused appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing after being found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment.

The accused suffers from an untreated delusional disorder, lacks insight into his illness, and exhibits paranoid and persecutory beliefs.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his high risk of violence and lack of protective factors.

A detention order was issued, requiring the accused to remain detained at the hospital with conditions including a communication prohibition and a radius restriction regarding the victims.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, had been residing in a supervised group home and demonstrating relative stability.

Based on psychiatric evidence and joint submissions, the Board concluded the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge requiring the accused to reside at the group home, with a provision authorizing police to arrest and return her to the hospital in the event of a breach.