M.D. Segal

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

The accused, who suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia, had a successful year in the community, maintaining employment and complying with his clozapine treatment.

The Board accepted the joint position that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his brittle mental illness and vulnerability to stress.

The Board ordered the continuation of his conditional discharge with modifications, including reduced reporting frequency and the removal of substance testing conditions, while maintaining a weapons prohibition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault in 1996.

The hospital and Crown sought a continuation of the detention order with an increased reporting frequency due to recent mental health decompensations and an upcoming destabilizing housing transition.

The accused did not attend the hearing but his counsel took no position.

The Board unanimously found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight, history of violence and fire-setting, and reliance on external supervision for medication compliance.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order with increased reporting to closely monitor the accused during his transition to new community housing.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief and uttering threats.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizoaffective Disorder and Substance Use Disorder, had recently transitioned to independent living and maintained abstinence from substances.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, supported by psychiatric evidence, finding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

A detention disposition was maintained, but conditions were varied to remove the abstain clause to test his internal motivation, while retaining a residential treatment clause and modifying pass privileges to support his ongoing community reintegration.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing bodily harm and other offences.

At the initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the Board found that the accused continued to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

Accepting the joint recommendation of the parties and the hospital, the Board ordered a conditional discharge to allow for further diagnostic assessment and treatment in the community.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault after stabbing a stranger.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the hospital and Crown sought a detention order, which the accused did not oppose.

The Board heard psychiatric evidence that the accused has a complex mental disorder, a strong history of substance abuse, and requires further psychoeducation and treatment.

Finding that the accused poses a significant threat to public safety and that a conditional discharge would be inadequate to manage his risk of decompensation, the Board ordered his continued detention at the hospital.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for breaking and entering, was living in the community under a detention order.

Following a decline in his mental condition, including paranoid ideation, aggression, and admitted alcohol consumption, he was admitted to the hospital, restricting his liberties.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing and found that the initial admission and continuing hospitalization were warranted and appropriate to stabilize his condition and manage the risk to public safety.

The Board also approved the addition of a residential treatment clause to the Disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The accused sought a Conditional Discharge and a transfer to another hospital, while the hospital and Attorney General sought a continuation of the Detention Order.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his treatment-resistant schizoaffective disorder, history of violence, and lack of insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order with a minor amendment to community access and declined to order a hospital transfer.

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

The Hospital and the Crown sought a Detention Order, while the accused sought an Absolute Discharge or, alternatively, a Conditional Discharge.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to her history of substance use and the risk of rapid mental status decompensation if she were to stop her medication or resume using crystal methamphetamine.

However, noting her remarkable stability in the community over the past two years, the Board concluded that a Conditional Discharge with conditions including substance use abstention and weekly reporting was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

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

The accused had been found not criminally responsible for offences including assaulting a peace officer causing bodily harm.

The Board found that the accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a Detention Order, but expanded his privileges to include 36-hour community passes and the opportunity for supervised community living, as jointly recommended by the parties.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for various offences, was subject to a disposition allowing community living privileges.

The Hospital restricted his off-unit privileges after he was found in possession of and consumed methamphetamine, which led to a deterioration in his mental state.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction.

The Board found that while the restriction constituted a significant increase in the accused's liberty restrictions, the Hospital's actions were warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measure to manage his risk to public safety while his mental condition was stabilized.

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 other offences, suffers from schizoaffective disorder and a substance use disorder.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the expert evidence of the attending psychiatrist, finding that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a Detention Order with minor variations, as it is the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage her risk while supporting her community reintegration.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assaulting a peace officer, was subject to a Restriction of Liberty by the hospital following a positive drug screen for cocaine and concerning behavioural changes.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction.

The Board found that the restriction was well justified, necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive and least onerous course of action given the accused's substance use, lack of transparency, and need for close monitoring.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, was subject to a review of her disposition by the Ontario Review Board.

The parties jointly submitted that she no longer represented a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board accepted the joint submission and the evidence of her attending psychiatrist, finding that her mental health was stable, she was compliant with treatment, and she had strong community supports including a Community Treatment Order.

The Board concluded that the accused did not pose a significant threat to public safety and granted an absolute discharge.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and vascular dementia, sought an absolute discharge, while the hospital and Crown recommended continuing the detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing symptoms, lack of insight, and a history of medication non-adherence.

The Board confirmed the detention order, noting the absence of a realistic community release plan.

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

The accused continues to suffer from schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, remains symptomatic, and is not yet well enough to participate in therapy.

Based on a joint submission and psychiatric evidence, the Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and maintained the current detention order with privileges.

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

The accused, diagnosed with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, had stopped taking antipsychotic medication and exhibited ongoing paranoia and imperfect insight.

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

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge, but reduced reporting requirements and removed the submit samples and consent to treatment clauses, representing the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The accused, previously found unfit to stand trial on account of mental disorder, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual hearing.

Based on the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused's condition had improved, he understood the trial process and the roles of key participants, and he could meaningfully instruct counsel.

The Board concluded the accused was now fit to stand trial and ordered him returned to court.

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

The accused's treating psychiatrist testified that the accused is currently stable, abstinent from substances, and compliant with medication in a group home setting.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, finding that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety, and ordered that the current disposition remain in place without changes.

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

The accused continues to suffer from schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, experiencing auditory and visual hallucinations.

Based on the evidence of the treating psychiatrist and a joint submission, the Board concluded that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The previous disposition was renewed on the same conditions.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to correct an oversight in the accused's previous disposition.

The accused had been found unfit to stand trial and was ordered transferred to a different hospital.

The previous disposition erroneously awarded him indirectly supervised hospital and grounds privileges at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, which do not exist at that facility.

On consent of all parties, the Board ordered the deletion of the erroneous paragraph, leaving the rest of the disposition intact.