Andrew Giuseppe Antonio Confente

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine whether the accused, previously found unfit to stand trial on various charges, remained unfit.

Based on the evidence of her treating psychiatrist, the accused's mental status had stabilized following medication optimization and abstinence from substances.

The Board found the accused was now able to understand the nature of the proceedings, the roles of court officers, and instruct counsel.

The Board concluded the accused was fit to stand trial and ordered her returned to court, remaining detained at the hospital in the interim.

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 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 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 accused was found not criminally responsible for attempted murder after stabbing the victim over 40 times while experiencing psychosis.

At the initial Ontario Review Board disposition hearing, the Board considered the accused's diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorders, alongside a history of rapid decompensation and aggression when non-compliant with medication.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found the accused poses a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention disposition at the hospital, granting gradual, indirectly supervised community access privileges to support rehabilitation, while imposing a no-contact order and perimeter restrictions regarding the victim.

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 Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and a restriction of liberties hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for arson.

The hospital had readmitted the accused from the community due to decompensation linked to cigarette smoking, which lowered his clozapine levels.

The Board found the readmission was warranted and the least restrictive measure available to manage his risk.

The Board also concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his treatment-refractory schizoaffective disorder, history of medication non-compliance, and risk of rapid decompensation.

A Detention Order was maintained.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for firearms and uttering threats offences and was diagnosed with schizophrenia.

The Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight, ongoing paranoia, and risk of medication non-compliance if discharged.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order on the same terms to support his gradual transition to community living.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been living successfully in the community for several years and maintained medication compliance despite lacking insight into his illness.

The Board applied the Winko framework and found that the evidence did not establish that the accused continued to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board granted an absolute discharge, noting the accused's stable housing, ongoing support from community mental health teams, and the absence of any attempts to contact the victim.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a significant increase in the restrictions on the liberties of an accused found not criminally responsible.

The hospital had placed the accused in seclusion and locked his room after he engaged in an unprovoked, violent attack on a co-patient due to auditory hallucinations.

The Board found that the hospital's actions constituted a significant increase in liberty restrictions, but concluded that the measures were warranted, justified, and represented the least onerous means of managing the accused's risk to public safety.

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

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and polysubstance use disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his major mental illness, substance use history, and limited insight.

The Board ordered that the accused remain detained at the hospital with the same privileges as the previous disposition.

The Board also considered whether to order a Gladue Report given the accused's Indigenous heritage, but declined to do so at this time, noting the extensive information already available and the accused's hesitation to participate in the potentially intrusive process.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.

The accused had a lengthy history of mental illness, substance abuse, and antisocial personality disorder, marked by repeated rule violations and bringing contraband into the hospital.

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

A Detention Order was maintained as the necessary and appropriate disposition, being the least onerous and least restrictive option available to manage the accused's risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder in 1979.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizoaffective Disorder, had a history of unprovoked assaults while detained, including a 2021 assault on his psychiatrist.

The treatment team reported recent stability following a hospital transfer but cautioned that his risk of violence remained high without a structured forensic environment.

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

The Board ordered a continuation of the Detention Order but granted indirectly supervised hospital and grounds privileges as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, while denying community passes.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for dangerous operation causing death after driving through a stop sign at high speed and striking a motorcyclist.

At her initial Ontario Review Board disposition hearing, the panel found she poses a significant threat to public safety due to her Schizoaffective Disorder, history of medication nonadherence, and risk of psychotic relapse.

The Board ordered her detained at the Forensic Psychiatry Program with community living privileges, subject to strict conditions including substance abstinence and a driving prohibition.

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

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for indecent act and failure to comply with probation, is currently subject to a Detention Order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to active symptoms of schizophrenia, cognitive impairment, and a propensity for verbal and physical aggression.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to the Detention Order, as it is the least onerous and least restrictive disposition available to manage the risk.

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

The accused's privileges were reduced from Level 5 to Level 0 due to escalating antisocial and intimidating behaviours towards other patients and staff.

The Board accepted the attending psychiatrist's evidence and found that the restriction was a significant departure from the accused's liberty norm, but was necessary and appropriate for public safety.

The Board concluded the restriction was the least onerous and least restrictive measure available.

The accused was found not criminally responsible (NCR) on charges of break and enter and uttering threats.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine the appropriate disposition.

The Board found that the accused, who suffers from Bipolar 1 Disorder with psychotic features and concurrent substance use disorders, poses a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the accused be subject to a Detention Order at St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton to allow for medication optimization, stabilization, and engagement in therapeutic programming.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for robbery in 2007, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual hearing.

The accused has treatment-refractory schizophrenia and a history of substance use and elopement attempts.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly submitted that the current Detention Order with privileges up to community living in 24-hour supervised accommodation remained necessary and appropriate.

The Board accepted the joint submission and the evidence of the treating psychiatrist, concluding that the accused's continued risk profile warranted maintaining the current Disposition without changes.

The patient, who was found not criminally responsible for arson in 2016, appeared for her annual Review Board hearing.

She sought a Conditional Discharge, while the hospital and Crown sought a continuation of her Detention Order.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that the patient's schizoaffective disorder remains fragile, particularly due to an ongoing sleep disorder that can trigger psychotic symptoms and impulsive behaviour.

The Board concluded that the patient continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the Detention Order, with minor modifications to travel passes and reporting requirements to ensure it remains the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.