Bianca Francesca Benincasa

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the restriction of the accused's liberty following his placement in seclusion at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

The accused's mental condition had deteriorated due to medication non-adherence, leading to aggressive behaviour.

The Board found that the seclusion from February 16 to March 15, 2026, was necessary and appropriate to mitigate the risk to co-patients and staff, and was the least onerous and least restrictive option available.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the hospital's decision to place the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for murder, in seclusion for more than seven days.

The accused had discontinued his medication, decompensated, and attempted to assault staff.

All parties agreed that the seclusion was warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive option available.

The Board accepted the joint position and found the restriction of liberty was justified.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder.

The accused suffers from a treatment-refractory schizoaffective disorder and experienced significant decompensation over the past year due to medication noncompliance, requiring multiple periods of seclusion.

The Board accepted the joint submission that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his detention at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care with grounds privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for two counts of murder, rape, and indecent assault.

The accused, diagnosed with Sexual Sadism, Transvestic Fetishism, and Antisocial Personality Disorder, sought an amendment to his detention disposition to allow an escorted bank visit.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that his disorders are untreatable.

The Board maintained the detention disposition at the secure forensic facility but granted the request for a one-time, staff-escorted bank visit.

The defendant, Carlos Galeano, brought a Charter application alleging breaches of ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) by police during a traffic stop and subsequent vehicle search under the Cannabis Control Act (CCA), and delayed access to counsel.

The court found that while the initial traffic stop and grounds for a CCA search were valid, the search itself was conducted in an unreasonable and overbroad manner, exceeding the statutory authority.

Furthermore, police failed to facilitate access to counsel at the scene and during a lengthy delay at the police station.

Consequently, the court found breaches of ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter and ordered the exclusion of all seized evidence and statements under s. 24(2).

The appellant, convicted of importing cocaine, sought leave to appeal her sentence of six years and three months.

She argued the trial judge erred by failing to consider collateral consequences related to her children's care by the Catholic Children's Aid Society and the impact of systemic discrimination and racism.

The Court of Appeal granted leave but dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge adequately considered family circumstances as a mitigating factor and that systemic factors, while relevant to responsibility, do not diminish the gravity of the offence.

The sentence was at the low end of the established range for such offences.