J. Goldenberg

The Ontario Review Board held an early review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and other offences.

The hospital requested a change from a conditional discharge to a detention order due to the accused's deterioration, medication non-compliance, positive cocaine tests, and antisocial behaviour.

The Board found the accused continued to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered detention at the hospital with a full range of privileges, including community living in approved accommodation.

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

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly recommended a continuation of the detention order at a Secure Forensic Unit, with the ability to transfer to a General Forensic Unit and a new privilege for 24-hour supervised community living.

The Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, recent AWOL, and partial insight.

The Board ordered continued detention with the requested privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review two restrictions of liberty imposed on the accused by the hospital: placement in locked seclusion and transfer to a Secure Forensic Unit.

The restrictions followed a code white incident where the accused became agitated, threatening, and refused medication.

The Board found that both the initial placement in seclusion and the transfer to the Secure Forensic Unit were warranted.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused's ongoing detention in the Secure Forensic Unit remains the least onerous and least restrictive decision consistent with public safety.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and a Restriction of Liberty (ROL) hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible.

The accused had her pass privileges drastically reduced by the hospital after a single relapse into substance use, and the hospital failed to provide a timely ROL notice.

The Board continued the Detention Order, finding the accused remained a significant threat to public safety, but strongly criticized the hospital for failing to provide timely notice and for automatically reducing privileges in a manner that ignored the accused's liberty interests.

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

The accused, now a dual-status offender serving a federal sentence for assaulting hospital staff, was recently transferred to a federal institution in British Columbia.

The parties jointly submitted that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding the accused continues to pose a significant threat, and ordered the continuation of his detention order at the secure forensic hospital.

The accused was found Not Criminally Responsible (NCR) on charges of aggravated assault, assault, and threatening bodily harm.

The Ontario Review Board held a disposition hearing to determine if the accused posed a significant risk to public safety.

The Board found that the accused, who suffers from treatment-resistant schizoaffective disorder and has a history of medication non-compliance, remains a significant threat to the public.

The Board ordered a hybrid Detention Order at the secure forensic unit, with discretion for the person in charge to transfer the accused to a general forensic unit, along with specific privileges and restrictions.

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'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 accused, previously found not criminally responsible for violent offences, underwent an annual review of his Conditional Discharge by the Ontario Review Board.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly recommended continuing the Conditional Discharge, with the Attorney General requesting the removal of an address notification condition that conflicted with a residency requirement.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but that the threat can be managed in the community with the modified Conditional Discharge.

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

The hospital and the Attorney General sought a continuation of the Detention Order, while the accused sought an Absolute Discharge.

Relying on the unanimous expert evidence of the clinical teams, the Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and requires the structure of a Detention Order to ensure treatment compliance and housing approval.

The Detention Order was continued.

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

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

Despite periods of stability, the accused recently decompensated due to cannabis use, requiring readmission to the hospital.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a continuation of the Detention Order on a General Forensic Unit.

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

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused all agreed that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but has shown recent progress following medication adjustments and ECT treatments.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation and issued a Hybrid Order, directing detention in a Secure Forensic Unit with discretion for the hospital to transfer the accused to a General Forensic Unit.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for two counts of attempted murder and one count of assault after stabbing his mother and sister.

At his annual review hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered whether he remained a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's limited insight into his schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, combined with his stated intention to stop medication if released, meant he remained a significant threat.

The Board ordered the continuation of his Detention Order at the hospital as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on a charge of aggravated assault after stabbing his father.

At the initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the hospital, Crown, and accused jointly recommended a detention order.

The Board accepted the clinical evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but is responding well to treatment.

The Board ordered the accused detained in a General Forensic Unit at Ontario Shores with specified privileges.

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

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and mischief, was subject to a detention order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

All parties, including the accused, the hospital, and the Attorney General, consented to continuing the existing detention order with no changes.

The Board heard evidence from the treating psychiatrist and agreed to continue the detention order, including a community living clause to motivate the accused's progress.

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 possession of property obtained by crime and failing to comply with probation.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended continued detention in a Secure Forensic Unit, with discretion to transfer to a General Forensic Unit, noting the accused's history of unauthorized absences, recent assaults on co-patients, and refusal of certain treatments.

The accused did not oppose the recommendation.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered his continued detention at the Secure Forensic Unit with the requested discretion.

The Ontario Review Board held a restriction of liberty hearing after the hospital transferred the accused from a general forensic unit to a secure forensic unit following an elopement where he stole a car and drove erratically.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive option given the accused's impulsivity, substance use, and need for medication stabilization.

The Board also amended the disposition to remove the word 'General' from the location of detention, allowing the hospital discretion over the appropriate level of security.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder.

The accused had recently decompensated, absconded from the hospital, and resumed substance use, though he was working to regain lost progress.

The Board accepted the uncontested psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of violence, major mental disorder, and substance use risk.

The Board ordered the continuation of his Detention Order in a General Forensic Unit with existing conditions.