J. Weinstein

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for second-degree murder.

The accused, who suffers from a seizure disorder and postictal psychosis, was detained at a forensic psychiatry program.

All parties agreed the accused remained a significant threat to public safety.

The Board considered whether to add a community living term to the detention order.

Applying the framework from Simonic, the Board found that granting community living privileges would serve a therapeutic purpose, motivate the accused's progress, and prevent waitlist prejudice.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order with amended terms permitting community living in supervised accommodation.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for several violent offences.

The hospital, Attorney-General, and the accused jointly submitted that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and recommended a continuation of the existing Detention Order.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found that while the accused has made progress in maintaining sobriety and adhering to his medication regimen, he requires further assessment of his ability to cope with independent living.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's conditional discharge following a finding of not criminally responsible for robbery.

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar 1 Disorder, had an exceptional year of psychiatric stability and abstinence while living in the community.

However, the Board accepted the hospital's recommendation that the accused requires additional time under reduced controls before an absolute discharge is appropriate.

The Board found the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge with amended, less restrictive terms.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review of his conditional discharge.

The Board considered whether he remained a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused remained a significant threat due to treatment-resistant schizophrenia and ongoing issues with medication adherence.

However, acknowledging his 12 years of sobriety, the Board continued the conditional discharge but removed the condition requiring urine and breath samples.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on seven charges of sexual assault.

The accused suffers from severe dementia and resides in a locked long-term care unit.

The Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial, as he cannot understand the nature or consequences of the proceedings or communicate with counsel.

The Board also concluded that the accused is permanently unfit and remains a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing sexually inappropriate behaviour.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order as the necessary and appropriate disposition.

The hospital restricted the accused's liberty after he relapsed into severe substance abuse, spending $12,000 on drugs in two days and presenting in a drug-induced psychotic state.

The hospital sought a review of the restriction of liberty and a variance to the accused's disposition to allow him to reside in Ottawa or Cornwall and attend a residential treatment program.

The Ontario Review Board found the restriction of liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous measure to ensure public safety and the accused's rehabilitation.

The Board also granted the requested variance.

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

The accused, who suffers from a progressive neurocognitive disorder, was previously found unfit to stand trial on sexual offences.

The Board found that the accused remains permanently unfit to stand trial as his poor memory prevents meaningful communication with counsel.

The Board also concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety, as he requires placement in a long-term care facility where he could potentially come into contact with children.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge with a minor variation.

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 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 Ontario Review Board held a disposition hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for weapons and assault offences.

The hospital recommended a Detention Order with community living provisions but opposed international travel passes sought by the accused.

The Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, lack of insight, and history of sexually inappropriate and aggressive behaviour.

The Board ordered a Detention Order with community living provisions but denied the travel passes as premature.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and referred to the Ontario Review Board.

The Board held an initial disposition hearing to determine if the accused posed a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's history of violence, schizophrenia, and substance use disorders rendered him a significant threat, particularly given his stated intention to resume substance use.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at the hospital with conditions including abstention from substances and a no-contact order with the victim.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences due to schizophrenia.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted expert evidence of the attending psychiatrist that the accused has made significant progress in insight and medication compliance but remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge as the necessary and appropriate disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for second-degree murder.

The Board considered whether the accused remained a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's ongoing psychotic symptoms, stress management challenges, and lack of stable protective factors demonstrated a continued significant threat.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order.

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

The treatment team reported the accused had a positive year in transitional housing but remained vulnerable to stress and substance use relapse.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

A Conditional Discharge was ordered, and the Board maintained the requirement that the accused abstain from alcohol and drugs, finding its removal premature.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and cannabis use disorder, had recently decompensated due to medication nonadherence and exhibited aggressive behaviour towards hospital staff.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and would likely deteriorate further without supervision.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order.

The accused was found not criminally responsible (NCR) on two counts of second-degree murder and one count of aggravated assault.

At his initial Disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the Board found that he remains a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing psychotic symptoms, limited insight into his substance use disorders, and a history of severe violence.

The Board ordered his detention at a secure forensic hospital.

While the hospital recommended indirectly supervised community passes, the Board restricted his privileges to accompanied passes only, finding that indirectly supervised passes were premature given his recent admission and need for further stabilization and assessment.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and substance use disorder, had made some progress but continued to struggle with insight, medication adherence, and substance cravings.

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

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order to ensure adequate monitoring and protection of the public.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder and designated a high-risk offender.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered his continued detention.

However, recognizing his clinical progress, the Board approved a joint recommendation to transfer him from a high-secure to a medium-secure forensic facility with increased privileges, including escorted community passes.

The Board dismissed the accused's request to refer his high-risk offender designation back to the Superior Court for removal, finding that his progress had not been significantly impeded by the designation and the threshold for referral was not met.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for aggravated assault and assault causing bodily harm after stabbing two family members while experiencing persecutory delusions.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered expert psychiatric evidence indicating the accused's ongoing symptoms of schizophrenia, impulsivity, and sexually disinhibited behaviour.

Applying the Winko framework, the Board concluded the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

A Detention Order at the hospital was issued, as community living was deemed premature while his medication regimen is being optimized.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for violent offences against her son, underwent an annual Review Board hearing.

The hospital and Crown recommended continuing her Detention Order with increased privileges, while the accused sought a Conditional Discharge to move to Windsor.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to her schizophrenia, cognitive impairments, and vulnerability to stress.

The Board concluded a Detention Order was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage her risk and enforce a no-contact provision with her victim.