C. Francis

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine whether the accused, who had been found unfit to stand trial on charges of uttering threats and attempting to disarm a police officer, remained unfit.

The Board concluded that the accused remained unfit to stand trial due to his intellectual developmental disorder and schizoaffective disorder.

The Board ordered a detention disposition at a high-secure hospital to manage his risk of harm and support his return to fitness, and directed the preparation of a Gladue Report.

The Board also determined it lacked jurisdiction to review a prior period of seclusion, as it occurred before the Board had made a disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty of an accused found not criminally responsible, who had been placed in seclusion at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and a history of violence, was placed in seclusion after his mental state decompensated and he refused medication.

The Board heard evidence from the treating psychiatrist that the seclusion remained necessary due to the accused's risk, though he was showing improvement after starting injectable medication.

The Board concluded that the restriction of liberty was justified, necessary, and the least onerous and least restrictive placement available.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a significant restriction of liberty after the accused, who was found not criminally responsible, was placed in seclusion for over seven days.

The hospital presented evidence that the accused posed a constant risk to female staff and that seclusion was the only viable option until his medication was adjusted.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence without reservation, finding that the seclusion from November 11 to December 23, 2025, was warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to protect public safety.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for common nuisance, forcible confinement, assaulting a peace officer, and mischief.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the panel found that he continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his diagnosis of schizophrenia, history of violence, and noncompliance with medication.

The panel ordered his detention at the High Secure Provincial Forensic Program at Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for dangerous operation of a motor vehicle and other offences.

The Board heard evidence that the accused continues to suffer from treatment-refractory schizophrenia, lacks insight into his illness, and refuses to accept his treating psychiatrist.

The Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered that he remain subject to a Detention Disposition with no change to the current terms.

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

The accused, who suffers from schizophrenia, a neurocognitive disorder, and antisocial personality disorder, sought to reside in the community with his mother.

The hospital and the Attorney General submitted that he should continue to reside at his current highly supervised residence.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his cognitive challenges and history of aggressive behaviour.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention order, concluding that the accused requires significant day-to-day support and supervision that his mother could not provide.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences in 1993.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel.

The attending psychiatrist testified that the accused remains residually psychotic, lacks insight, and refuses to engage with the treatment team.

Applying the Winko threshold, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order at the high-secure forensic hospital, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault due to Schizophrenia.

The Board considered whether the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety and the appropriate disposition.

Relying on psychiatric evidence of persistent auditory hallucinations, catatonia, and unpredictable aggression, the Board found the accused remains a significant threat.

The Board ordered continued detention at a high secure forensic hospital, concluding that a conditional or absolute discharge would pose a significant risk to public safety.

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 conducted a mandatory review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder.

The accused sought increased privileges, including overnight travel passes.

The hospital and the Attorney General opposed any changes, citing the accused's persistent delusions, lack of insight, and recent aggressive behaviour.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered that the current detention disposition at the forensic hospital remain in place without increased privileges.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for dangerous driving and fleeing police.

At the initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the Board considered whether the accused remained a significant threat to public safety.

The Board found that the accused's history of non-compliance with treatment, ongoing psychotic symptoms, and substance use elevated his risk profile.

The Board concluded that a Detention Order with community living was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to manage the risk and protect the public, rejecting a request for a Conditional Discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assaulting a peace officer and mischief.

The accused suffers from treatment refractory schizoaffective disorder, substance use disorder, and intellectual development disorder.

The Board accepted the uncontested psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to experience psychotic symptoms, lacks insight, and requires 24/7 supervision.

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 disposition, with expanded geographic boundaries for passes to facilitate placement on a waitlist for supportive housing.

The hospital notified the Ontario Review Board of a restriction of liberty after the accused, who was detained at the hospital, became agitated and punched a nurse in the face.

The accused was placed in seclusion and restraints, and his privileges were cancelled.

A hearing was held pursuant to s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code.

The Board found that the restriction of liberty was justified, appropriate, and the least restrictive measure available in the circumstances.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for murder in 1979, is subject to a Detention Order at a high-secure forensic psychiatric facility.

The hospital recommended his transfer to a less secure facility.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The Board found that while the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, his condition has stabilized.

The Board ordered his transfer to the less secure North Bay Regional Health Centre, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition consistent with public safety.

The Board also ordered the preparation of a Gladue Report to support his culturally-informed treatment and reintegration.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for sexual interference and breach of probation.

The accused, who has a moderate intellectual disability and complex medical needs, has been detained in hospital since 1996.

Based on a joint submission and expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing disposition, detaining the accused at the forensic hospital with privileges for supervised community living.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for breach of probation and other offences.

The accused suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia and a substance use disorder.

During the review period, the accused relapsed into cannabis use, which exacerbated his psychotic symptoms and necessitated readmission to the hospital.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his ongoing symptoms, limited insight, and risk of decompensation.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order to ensure adequate supervision and the ability to rapidly readmit the accused if his mental state deteriorates.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault, robbery, and failing to comply with probation.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and a severe substance use disorder, and has a history of non-compliance with treatment.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused lacks insight into her illness and continues to experience psychotic symptoms.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of her detention at the hospital.

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

At her annual review hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered whether she continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontradicted expert psychiatric evidence that the accused was asymptomatic, compliant with treatment, and assessed at a low risk of violent re-offending, the Board found she no longer posed a significant threat.

The Board granted an absolute discharge.

The hospital requested an early Ontario Review Board hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, due to his escalating substance use and suspected medication non-compliance while living in the community.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and multiple substance use disorders, agreed with the hospital and the Attorney General that he remained a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused's risk of violence increases with substance use and that the Mental Health Act is insufficient to manage this risk, the Board accepted the joint submission.

The Board revoked the conditional discharge and imposed a detention order with an abstinence clause to ensure continuous monitoring and timely intervention.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine whether the accused, who had previously been found unfit to stand trial on charges including assault with a weapon, was now fit.

Based on the joint submission of the parties and the psychiatric evidence that the accused's condition had significantly improved with antipsychotic medication, the Board found the accused fit to stand trial.

To ensure his fitness is maintained prior to trial, the Board issued a Keep Fit Order and directed that he remain detained at the hospital pending his return to court.