R. W. Hill

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder and designated a high-risk offender.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered his continued detention.

However, recognizing his clinical progress, the Board approved a joint recommendation to transfer him from a high-secure to a medium-secure forensic facility with increased privileges, including escorted community passes.

The Board dismissed the accused's request to refer his high-risk offender designation back to the Superior Court for removal, finding that his progress had not been significantly impeded by the designation and the threshold for referral was not met.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine whether the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of aggravated assault, remained unfit.

The accused suffers from schizoaffective disorder and experiences fixed delusions regarding the court process, including beliefs that the trial judge was involved in a conspiracy against him.

Applying the Bharwani test, the Board found that the accused's delusions prevented him from having a reality-based understanding of the proceedings, rendering him unfit to stand trial.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care, finding it to be the least restrictive and most appropriate disposition given the accused's need for treatment and anticipated resistance to medication.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review two restrictions of liberty imposed on the accused by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and personality disorders, was readmitted to the hospital twice due to escalating regressive behaviour, specifically lying down in common areas and refusing to leave, which jeopardized his community housing.

The Board accepted the treating psychiatrist's evidence and found that both restrictions of liberty were warranted, necessary, and appropriate for the safety of the public and the accused, representing the least restrictive interventions available.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review two Restrictions of Liberty (ROL) imposed on the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.

The hospital restricted the accused's liberties after his mental status significantly deteriorated following a fall, leading to disorganization, paranoia, and aggressive behavior.

The Board found that both the March and April ROLs were warranted, necessary, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive measures to stabilize the accused's mental health.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson and mischief.

At the initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the Board found that the accused poses a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, cannabis use disorder, and history of medication non-compliance.

The Board ordered a Detention Order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health with privileges up to living in the community, rejecting the accused's request for a Conditional Discharge.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder, underwent an annual review of his Disposition by the Ontario Review Board.

The Board found that he continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his history of violence, maladaptive personality traits, and challenging behaviours in the hospital.

Given his complex medical needs and a request to be closer to family, the Board ordered his transfer from CAMH to St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton under a Detention Order with specific conditions.

The accused was found not criminally responsible (NCR) for multiple assault charges and referred to the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing.

The Board found that the accused, who suffers from schizoaffective disorder and a substance use disorder, remains floridly psychotic and lacks insight into her illness.

The Board concluded that she poses a significant threat to public safety and ordered her detained at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

The Board declined to grant a community living privilege, accepting expert evidence that it would be counter-therapeutic and that the accused is not a realistic candidate for discharge in the upcoming year.

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

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar Affective Disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder, has remained stable but continues to decline psychotropic medication and minimizes the risks of his past cannabis use.

The Board accepted the treatment team's evidence that the accused remains vulnerable to rapid decompensation without medication.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of his Detention Order at a General Forensic Unit.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty imposed on the accused, who had been found not criminally responsible for several offences.

The hospital had transferred the accused from a rehabilitation unit to an assessment unit after she repeatedly breached hospital rules and her Disposition by using cocaine and involving co-patients in smuggling drugs.

The Board applied the Campbell framework and found that the restriction of liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous intervention available to prevent further substance abuse and mental decompensation.

The Board also amended the Disposition to allow the accused to attend a residential treatment program.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board that the accused's liberty had been restricted following his placement in seclusion.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder, had been transferred to a high-secure forensic program after an unprovoked attack on his attending psychiatrist.

The Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty pursuant to section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board concluded that the initial and ongoing restriction of liberty was warranted, necessary for public safety, and represented the least onerous and least restrictive intervention available in the circumstances.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, was subject to an Ontario Review Board disposition allowing her to live in the community.

The hospital readmitted her after she consistently tested positive for illicit substances and breached her disposition conditions.

The Board convened a hearing to review the restriction of liberties under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

The Board found that the initial and ongoing restriction of the accused's liberty was warranted and represented the least restrictive and least onerous intervention necessary to manage her risk and address her substance use.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty of an accused found not criminally responsible, who was readmitted to the hospital from his community residence.

The readmission followed an incident where the accused became aggressive towards a caregiver attempting to enforce a medication administration protocol.

Applying the Campbell framework, the Board found that the initial restriction of liberty and the subsequent period of hospitalization were warranted and constituted the least restrictive and least onerous intervention in the circumstances.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to significantly restrict the liberty of an accused found not criminally responsible.

The accused had been readmitted to the hospital twice due to mental state deterioration, medication non-compliance, and alcohol use.

The Board found that the hospital's actions during both readmissions were the least onerous and least restrictive interventions necessary for public safety and the accused's well-being.

The Board also amended the accused's disposition to remove a recommendation for transfer to Alberta, as requested by the parties.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for weapons offences and was detained at a psychiatric hospital.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Ontario Review Board found that the accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and has a history of medication non-compliance, continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a Detention Order as the least onerous and restrictive disposition, but rejected a joint submission to include an abstinence clause, finding no evidence of prior substance use.

The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including assaulting a peace officer and mischief.

At her initial hearing before the Ontario Review Board, evidence from her treating physician indicated she had made significant progress, understood the court process, and could meaningfully instruct counsel.

The Board accepted the uncontradicted medical evidence and the agreement of all parties, finding the accused fit to stand trial.

The Board ordered her returned to court and issued a Keep Fit Order in the interim.