P. Prendergast

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the restriction of liberty imposed on the accused, who was placed in seclusion at a mental health facility for over seven days following an uncharacteristic assault on a staff member.

The accused, who has an anoxic brain injury and is largely non-verbal, was secluded after becoming highly agitated and striking a staff member.

The Board found that the seclusion was warranted to protect staff, other patients, and the accused himself.

The Board concluded that the seclusion was the least onerous and least restrictive intervention available and was appropriately discontinued once the accused successfully participated in seclusion relief.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for assault and other offences.

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

The Board accepted the joint submission, noting the accused's diagnoses of schizophrenia and alcohol use disorder, and ordered the maintenance of the current detention order with permission to live in approved community accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual hearing for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on charges of criminal harassment and invitation to sexual touching.

The accused, who has a moderate intellectual disability, resides in a specialized hospital unit.

The Board accepted the joint submission and psychiatric evidence that the accused remains permanently unfit to stand trial.

Considering the paramount need to protect the public and the accused's ongoing need for 24-hour support and risk management, the Board maintained the current detention order with permission to live in approved supervised community accommodation.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for uttering threats and criminal harassment.

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

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention order, noting that while the accused has made progress, he requires close monitoring and supervision to manage his risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and a restriction of liberties hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and uttering threats.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had his community privileges restricted after an unauthorized leave of absence during which he consumed cannabis and was found in a psychotic state.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered a continuation of his detention disposition, concluding that he requires the structured monitoring of the hospital.

The Board also held that the hospital's restriction of his liberties was not significant in the circumstances, but rather a necessary and least restrictive day-to-day management of his risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for robbery.

The hospital and the Attorney General proposed continuing the current disposition, which detained the accused at the hospital with privileges up to living in the community.

The accused requested a modification to allow indirectly supervised travel passes to Nova Scotia.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused lacked the organization to travel alone, noting a recent elopement and cannabis use.

Finding that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety, the Board ordered the continuation of the disposition without change.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberties of an accused found not criminally responsible, following his assault on a co-patient.

The hospital had placed the accused in seclusion and gradually restored his privileges over a month.

The Board found that the restrictions on the accused's liberties were significant but necessary and appropriate to monitor his mental state and ensure the safety of the co-patient.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for three counts of dangerous operation of a conveyance and referred to the Ontario Review Board.

The Board unanimously found that the accused, who suffers from bipolar disorder, represents a significant threat to public safety, particularly when driving in a manic state.

By a 3-2 majority, the Board ordered a Detention Order with conditions, including a strict driving prohibition, prioritizing public safety over the accused's employment and family access needs.

The dissenting members would have omitted the driving prohibition, finding it unnecessary to manage the risk.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for break and enter with intent, underwent an annual Review Board hearing.

The hospital and Attorney General recommended maintaining his detention at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton with slight amendments to community privileges, while retaining a prohibition on substance use.

The accused requested the removal of the cannabis prohibition.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his schizoaffective disorder, cannabis use disorder, and lack of insight.

The Board ordered his continued detention with the agreed-upon privilege amendments, concluding that removing the cannabis prohibition would be premature and increase his risk of relapse and violence.

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 other offences due to schizophrenia.

The parties jointly submitted that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but has made significant progress, including medication compliance, abstinence from substances, and vocational achievements.

The Board accepted the joint submission and ordered a conditional discharge as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, with conditions including a consent to treatment.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle and assault with a weapon.

The accused, who suffers from schizophrenia, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and Attorney General recommended continuing the conditional discharge but removing substance prohibition clauses.

Relying on psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to experience fluctuating delusions, lacks insight, and would likely disengage from treatment if discharged absolutely, the Board found he remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a continued conditional discharge with the removal of the substance prohibition and Young clauses.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault and other offences.

The accused sought an absolute discharge or, alternatively, the removal of a cannabis prohibition from his disposition.

The hospital and Crown sought continued detention.

Relying on psychiatric evidence that the accused lacks insight, rejects his schizophrenia diagnosis, and would abandon treatment and abuse substances if discharged, the Board found he remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered continued detention with the existing conditions, including the cannabis prohibition.

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

The accused was living in the community under a conditional discharge.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended continuing the conditional discharge but removing the absolute prohibition on substance use to test the accused's internal motivation to abstain, as he approaches an absolute discharge.

The Board agreed, finding that while the accused remains a significant threat to public safety without forensic support, removing the abstention clause while maintaining testing was appropriate to measure his commitment to avoiding substances.

The conditional discharge was continued with the abstention clause removed.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder and criminal negligence causing death.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and substance use disorders, and a history of decompensation and non-compliance when granted increased liberty in the community.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his mental illness, substance use, lack of insight, and antisocial attitudes.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order, including a transfer to a different mental health centre.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for sexual interference, criminal harassment, and sexual assault.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to make a disposition.

The Board accepted the joint submission and the unchallenged psychiatric evidence that the accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia and experiences offence-paralleling delusions, poses a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention order with privileges up to and including community living in approved accommodation to allow for inpatient treatment, medication optimization, and rehabilitative programming.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible.

The hospital and the Crown recommended continuing the detention order with amended conditions for community access and reporting.

The Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to recent physical assaults, impulsivity, and non-compliance with rules.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order with the recommended amendments to manage the risk to public safety.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing to review the conditional discharge of the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault in 2004.

The accused, diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and the Crown argued that he remains a significant threat to public safety and requires continued supervision.

The Board found that the accused lacks insight into his condition, has a history of aggressive behaviour, and would likely stop taking his medication if discharged.

Concluding that the accused remains a significant threat to the safety of the public, the Board ordered the continuation of the current conditional discharge.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, sought a conditional discharge, while the hospital and Attorney General recommended continuing his detention order.

The Board accepted the attending psychiatrist's evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and requires the structure, supervision, and medication management provided under a detention order.

The Board concluded that a detention order remains the necessary and appropriate disposition and denied the request for a conditional discharge.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for uttering a threat, was readmitted to the hospital after his condition deteriorated, suspected to be due to substance use.

A restriction of liberty hearing was held to determine if the readmission was necessary and warranted under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

The Ontario Review Board found that the initial readmission was justified due to the accused's manic-like symptoms and potential risk.

However, the Board concluded that the evidence did not support detaining the accused in the hospital beyond nine days after his readmission, as he had returned to his baseline condition.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for arson and referred to the Ontario Review Board.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties and issued a Detention Order with community living privileges, finding that the accused poses a significant threat to public safety that requires the structure of a Detention Order to manage her risk of psychotic decompensation.