M.D. Segal

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 held an annual hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including sexual assault and theft.

The hospital and Crown sought to maintain the Detention Order, citing ongoing substance use, absconding, and poor insight into his mental health condition.

The accused sought an absolute discharge.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant risk to public safety and requires significant supervision in a highly supportive environment.

The Detention Order was maintained as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault and weapons offences in 2019.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, had recently been transferred to a new hospital and demonstrated significant progress, including medication adherence and abstinence from substances.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but accepted a joint submission to expand his privileges, maintaining a Detention Order with increased access to the community.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and assaulting a peace officer, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual hearing.

The accused has been living in the community on a conditional discharge, maintaining abstinence from cannabis, and complying with his treatment regimen for schizophrenia.

All parties agreed that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but recommended removing the abstinence and consent to treatment clauses from his disposition to test his independence.

The Board accepted the joint submission, maintaining the conditional discharge while removing the specified clauses to support the accused's pathway toward an absolute discharge.

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

The accused has a history of substance-induced psychosis and polysubstance dependence.

During the review period, the accused absconded and relapsed into substance use, demonstrating a continued significant risk to public safety.

The Board maintained the detention order, expanded the approved accommodation catchment area to include the Greater Toronto Area, and denied the accused's request to permit weekend cannabis consumption.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder and assault causing bodily harm, had his annual hearing before the Ontario Review Board.

The hospital and the accused sought a Conditional Discharge, which the Crown ultimately supported.

The Board found that while the accused remains a significant threat to public safety, his stability, lack of psychosis, and successful reintegration into the community warranted a Conditional Discharge.

The Board imposed conditions, including a requirement to report at least twice a month.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for pushing a victim onto subway tracks, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for her annual hearing.

The hospital and the accused sought to remove a restriction preventing her from accessing subway platforms unaccompanied, which the Crown opposed.

The Board found that while she remains a significant threat to public safety, her condition has stabilized with medication and abstinence from substances.

The Board accepted the hospital's cautious, iterative approach to reintegration and removed the subway restriction, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for weapons offences in 2008 due to schizophrenia.

The accused had recently been transferred to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health after a two-year wait.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, which was uncontested.

The Board ordered continued detention in the Secure Forensic Unit with escorted privileges, noting the accused's smooth transition and positive engagement with staff and family.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was found not guilty by reason of insanity for murder in 1990 and has treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

The parties presented a joint submission conceding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current disposition, noting the accused's successful transition to a group home, but reduced his reporting requirements from weekly to monthly.

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

The accused's diagnoses include unspecified schizophrenia spectrum and psychotic disorder, and substance use disorder in remission.

The hospital and Crown recommended a continuation of the Detention Order with the addition of community living in approved accommodation, which the accused supported.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant risk to the safety of the public but endorsed the joint submission as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief and other offences.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been living in a group home and demonstrated clinical stability over the review period.

All parties made a joint submission for a conditional discharge.

The Board found that while the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, the risk is manageable in the community.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with specified conditions.

The accused, previously found unfit to stand trial on three charges of assault, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual hearing.

The hospital brought a preliminary application to withhold certain disposition information from the accused, which the Board granted.

On the central issue of fitness, the accused's psychiatrist testified that the accused now understands the nature and object of court proceedings and can communicate with counsel.

All parties agreed the accused was fit.

The Board found the accused fit to stand trial and ordered him returned to court, noting the court's jurisdiction to make a Keep Fit Order.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to determine the appropriate disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief.

The accused's treatment team reported a positive year with improved insight, though he continues to experience fluctuations in his mental state.

All parties made a joint submission recommending a conditional discharge with a treatment clause.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but that his risk can be managed in the community on a conditional discharge.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for a mandatory annual review.

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly submitted that he remains a significant threat to public safety but has made progress in his treatment for schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding the accused continues to pose a significant threat, and ordered his continued detention at the forensic hospital with additional privileges to facilitate his rehabilitation.

The accused was found unfit to stand trial on account of mental disorder and referred to the Ontario Review Board.

At the initial hearing, the primary issue was whether the accused had become fit to stand trial.

The Board heard evidence from the accused's treating psychiatrist that she continues to experience psychotic symptoms, disorganization, and struggles to understand the trial process and consequences despite fitness coaching.

The Board applied the legal test for fitness and concluded that the accused remains unfit to stand trial.

A Detention Order on terms was issued.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty and disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for multiple violent offences.

While AWOL from the hospital, the accused relapsed into substance use and sent sexually violent and threatening emails to his treating psychiatrist.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was necessary and appropriate.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered his transfer to St. Joseph's Hospital in Hamilton, with strict conditions restricting his access to internet-enabled devices.

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

The accused sought a conditional discharge, while the hospital and Attorney General recommended continuing the existing detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his limited insight and reliance on highly supportive housing for stability.

The Board concluded that continuing the detention order with community living privileges remained the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an early review of the accused's disposition following his decompensation and readmission to the hospital.

The hospital requested the hearing to reinstate a prohibition on cannabis use, arguing it was necessary for the accused's stability and rehabilitation.

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

The Board ordered his continued detention at the hospital with a strict prohibition on all illicit substances, including cannabis, to provide external motivation for his recovery.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and failure to comply with a probation order.

The accused sought an absolute discharge or an amendment to permit unsupervised family visits.

The hospital and Crown opposed any changes.

Relying on the testimony of the treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to treatment-resistant schizophrenia, antisocial personality disorder, and a history of substance abuse.

The Board maintained the current detention order with privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review of the accused's conditional discharge disposition.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder, has a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

While she had a generally successful year living independently and maintaining employment, she incurred a new charge for breaching a no-contact condition and purchased a vehicle without consulting her treatment team.

The Board found that she continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to her limited insight and potential for rapid decompensation.

The Board ordered the continuation of her conditional discharge.