K. Brisson

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to significantly restrict the accused's liberty by placing him in seclusion following a severe assault on a co-patient.

The accused, who had previously been found not criminally responsible for assault, was secluded from November 2 to November 22, 2023, due to imminent risk of violence, active psychotic symptoms, and weapon-making behaviour.

The Board found the restriction of liberty was warranted and necessary for public safety.

Additionally, the Board ordered an independent assessment of the accused's mental condition and risk to public safety to be completed prior to his annual review hearing.

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

The accused, previously found NCR for mischief and uttering threats, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended maintaining the current detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his major mental illness, lack of insight, and history of non-compliance with treatment.

The Board ordered the maintenance of the current detention order, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder due to schizophrenia.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, necessitating a detention disposition.

However, noting the accused's significant progress, medication compliance, and stability in the community, the Board liberalized his privileges.

This included removing a prohibition on entering the city where the index offence occurred, allowing for a measured assessment of his stability in that environment while still under the Board's jurisdiction.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson due to a mental disorder.

At the initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the parties jointly recommended a conditional discharge.

The Board accepted the expert risk assessment indicating the accused's risk of violence is low when abstinent and supported, but that he remains vulnerable to relapse.

Finding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, the Board ordered a conditional discharge with terms requiring abstinence from intoxicants, testing, and ongoing psychiatric treatment.

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

The accused had made significant progress in hospital, adhering to medication and remaining abstinent from substances, following a new diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

However, the Board accepted expert evidence that the accused remained stress-vulnerable, lacked insight, and posed a significant threat to public safety if decompensated.

The Board ordered a Detention Disposition with expanded pass privileges to support his reintegration goals.

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

The accused suffers from clozapine-resistant schizophrenia and a severe substance use disorder, having recently relapsed into methamphetamine use.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order, with a modification to allow indirectly supervised privileges to facilitate the accused's participation in a residential drug and alcohol treatment program.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences against his mother.

The accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia, had been living in a supervised community residence and sought a Conditional Discharge.

The Hospital and the Attorney General sought a continued Detention Order, arguing it was necessary to manage his risk and ensure a quick return to the hospital if he decompensated.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety but concluded that his risk could be safely managed under a Conditional Discharge.

The Board imposed conditions including a specified residence, medication adherence, and Young clauses requiring him to return to the hospital for assessment or admission if directed.

The Hospital sought an early hearing before the Ontario Review Board, arguing that the accused, previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault, was now fit.

The accused's attending psychiatrist testified that his symptoms of schizophrenia and possible Huntington's Disease had improved significantly with clozapine, restoring his ability to understand the proceedings and instruct counsel.

The Board accepted this undisputed evidence and found the accused fit to stand trial.

The Board ordered him returned to court and noted that he would remain detained at the hospital under the existing disposition pending the court's determination of his fitness, making a separate 'keep fit' order unnecessary.

The Ontario Review Board held an early hearing regarding the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges of sexual offences.

The hospital requested the hearing due to the accused's declining physical health from metastatic lung cancer, which caused a major neurocognitive disorder.

The Board found the accused permanently unfit to stand trial and concluded he does not pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board recommended the Court hold an inquiry to determine whether a stay of proceedings should be ordered.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for offences including threatening death and causing a disturbance.

The accused, who has diagnoses of Schizoaffective Disorder and Substance Use Disorder, had made progress but continued to lack insight into his mental illness and need for medication.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused remained a moderate risk for violent re-offending and required the structure of a forensic setting.

The Board concluded the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered a continued detention disposition, while expanding his indirectly supervised community access to facilitate reintegration.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review four restrictions of liberty (seclusions) imposed on the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for robbery and uttering threats.

The hospital presented evidence that the seclusions were necessary due to the accused's escalating violent behaviour, threats, and refusal to take antipsychotic medication.

The accused conceded that the initial decisions to seclude were justified but challenged the length of the detentions.

The Board found that all four seclusions were justified, necessary, and the least restrictive measures available to manage the risk of harm to others.

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 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 accused's disposition.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for assault and assault with a weapon.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his schizophrenia, lack of insight, and ongoing cannabis use.

However, because he is stabilized on a long-acting injectable antipsychotic and consented to treatment, the Board ordered a conditional discharge with conditions including a consent to treatment provision and permission to travel internationally with an approved person.

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

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended maintaining a detention order and transferring the accused to the Brockville Mental Health Centre.

The accused did not contest the detention order but opposed the transfer.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his treatment-resistant schizophrenia and history of violence.

However, the Board declined to order the transfer, finding that the accused had only been at the current hospital for eight months and showed potential for improvement with recent medication adjustments.

A detention order with community living in approved accommodation was maintained.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including break and enter and driving while prohibited.

The accused has a history of severe substance use disorder and psychotic disorder.

The parties jointly submitted that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding that the accused's ongoing struggles with addiction and risk of decompensation require continued hospital oversight.

A detention order was maintained with modified conditions allowing for community access and travel.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been stable, compliant with medication, and abstinent from substances over the past year.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of non-adherence to treatment and risk factors.

The Board ordered the maintenance of the detention order with expanded privileges, including international travel and moderate alcohol consumption, to facilitate his transition to independent living.

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

The accused, who has treatment-resistant schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, was previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and indecent acts.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered a continued detention order with permission to reside in the community in approved accommodation, with minor amendments to conditions regarding cannabis and alcohol access.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for driving offences.

The accused, who suffers from a traumatic brain injury, schizoaffective disorder, and substance use disorders, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended maintaining the current detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his complex mental disorder, lack of insight, and propensity for substance use and risky behaviours.

The Board ordered that the current detention order, with privileges up to community living in approved accommodation, be maintained as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

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

The accused suffers from delusional disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and substance use disorders.

The Board accepted the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his polysubstance abuse and underdeveloped insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order Disposition, with a modification to permit Canada-wide travel.