J. Weinstein

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

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including assault and mischief, has diagnoses of schizophrenia and substance use disorder.

Over the review period, the accused experienced a relapse in symptoms and substance use while placed in a community group home, necessitating a return to the hospital.

Relying on psychiatric evidence that the accused remains a moderate to high risk for violent reoffending without supervision, the Board found that he continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Disposition with modified privileges to support his reintegration.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the accused's Detention Disposition.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, has diagnoses of schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

Based on the hospital report, expert testimony, and a joint submission from the parties, the Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Disposition at the Secure Forensic Unit, with discretion to transfer to a General Forensic Unit as his condition improves.

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

The accused, who has schizophrenia and substance use disorders, had several notable incidents of substance use and unauthorized absences in the past year.

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

The Board ordered the continuation of a Detention Order but amended the privileges to allow the accused to live in accommodation approved by the person in charge, rather than strictly supervised accommodation, to encourage gradual reintegration.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on charges of sexual assault and forcible confinement.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and major neurocognitive disorder, presenting with severe cognitive impairment and intermittent aggression.

Applying the test from R. v. Bharwani, the Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial as he cannot understand the proceedings or communicate with counsel.

Based on uncontroverted medical evidence, the Board concluded the accused is permanently unfit and remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order at the secure forensic unit.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to restrict the liberty of the accused, who had previously been found not criminally responsible.

The accused's liberty was restricted when he was transferred to the Forensic Assessment Unit and his community passes were revoked following an involuntary admission under the Mental Health Act due to active psychotic symptoms and aggressive behaviour.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was significant, necessary, and appropriate, representing the least onerous and least restrictive measure to ensure public safety.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for various offences including arson and assault with a weapon.

The accused had been detained at a secure forensic unit and was diagnosed with bipolar disorder, alcohol use disorder, and social anxiety disorder.

The hospital team reported that the accused had a positive year with no aggressive behaviours, full compliance with medication, and negative drug screens.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but concluded that a conditional discharge was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, adopting the joint recommendation of the parties.

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

The accused, who has mild intellectual disability and bipolar disorder, experienced a lengthy hospitalization during the reporting year due to medication non-adherence and manic episodes involving aggressive behaviour.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the expert evidence of the hospital representative, finding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

A continuation of the current Detention Order Disposition was deemed necessary and appropriate.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an 86-year-old accused charged with manslaughter who suffers from progressive dementia.

The Board found the accused permanently unfit to stand trial, as she was unable to understand the proceedings or communicate with counsel.

Relying on expert evidence that her mobility had decreased and she had exhibited no aggressive behaviour for over a year, the Board concluded she no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

The Board recommended the matter be returned to court to determine whether a stay of proceedings should be ordered.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges of committing indecent acts.

The assessing psychiatrist testified that the accused had become fit following medication optimization.

However, the Board rejected this opinion, finding the assessment inadequate and noting defense counsel's inability to meaningfully communicate with the accused.

The Board concluded the accused remained unfit to stand trial and ordered a Detention Order at the hospital, with privileges to live in the community to facilitate housing waitlists.

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

The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on assault charges.

The Board considered evidence from the treating physician and applied the fitness test from R v Bharwani.

The Board concluded that the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to cognitive impairment and communication limitations, but is not permanently unfit as he has shown some improvement.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order, finding that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and requires a high degree of supervision.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for mischief and animal cruelty.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been living in the community under a conditional discharge.

The hospital treatment team and all parties jointly recommended an absolute discharge, noting the accused's sustained stability, abstinence from substances, improved insight, and strong family support.

Applying the framework from Winko, the Board found the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety and granted an absolute discharge.

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 Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for a young person found unfit to stand trial on charges including assault with a weapon.

The parties jointly submitted that the accused was permanently unfit and required a Detention Order at CAMH.

The Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial and poses a significant threat to public safety, necessitating a Detention Order.

However, the Board rejected the joint submission that the accused is permanently unfit, finding that a full fitness assessment and tailored fitness education program had not been adequately explored given his learning disabilities and recent improvements on new medication.

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 Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for a young person found unfit to stand trial on weapons and assault charges.

The accused, diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder and learning disabilities, was jointly recommended by all parties to be found permanently unfit and transferred to an adult facility.

The Board agreed the accused remains unfit to stand trial and poses a significant threat to public safety, ordering his detention at CAMH.

However, the Board declined to find him permanently unfit, concluding that he had not received appropriate fitness training tailored to his cognitive needs.

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.