C. Gzik

The accused, who has a lengthy history of treatment-resistant schizophrenia, was previously found unfit to stand trial on several charges including unlawful entry and assault.

At a mandatory review hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered whether he had become fit.

Relying on the evidence of his attending psychiatrist, the Board found that while his condition had improved, he remained unfit due to severe thought disorganization and an inability to understand the adversarial nature of the proceedings.

The Board ordered his continued detention and directed his transfer to the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault and related offences.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and substance use disorders, had successfully transitioned to semi-independent living in the community.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety, as an absolute discharge would likely lead to medication nonadherence, substance relapse, and decompensation.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with terms including mandatory abstinence, medication compliance, and a condition to return to the hospital for psychiatric assessment upon notice.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and assault causing bodily harm.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder, had been residing in the community with his parents for over four years without incident.

Relying on the unanimous recommendation of the treatment team and the accused's sustained psychiatric stability, medication adherence, and strong family support, the Board concluded that the accused no longer poses a significant threat to public safety.

An absolute discharge was granted.

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

The accused suffers from schizoaffective disorder and an unspecified paraphilic disorder, and continues to exhibit sexually inappropriate behaviour towards female staff.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the uncontroverted evidence of the attending psychiatrist that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing detention disposition at the hospital, finding it necessary to manage her risk while efforts continue to find appropriate community housing.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault and uttering threats, was subject to a detention disposition.

The hospital sought a renewal of the detention order, arguing that the accused's cannabis use posed a significant threat to public safety.

The Ontario Review Board found that the accused had been consistently compliant with his antipsychotic medication and had not exhibited violent behaviour since the index offences, even when using cannabis.

The Board concluded that the evidence linking his cannabis use to a substantial risk of serious harm was speculative.

Finding that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public, the Board granted an absolute discharge.

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 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 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 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.

At a preliminary hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the Attorney General sought to summons the accused's mental health records from his time in federal custody and to compel his mother to testify.

The accused opposed the summons for records.

The Board ordered the production of the psychiatric and psychological records, citing its inquisitorial role and obligation to gather relevant evidence regarding whether the accused represents a significant threat to public safety.

The parties agreed to use the mother's trial transcript instead of compelling her testimony.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for two counts of aggravated assault.

The accused, diagnosed with Delusional Disorder, had been compliant with treatment and residing in the community without incident.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to underdeveloped insight into his illness and the index offences.

However, the Board concluded that his risk could be managed in the community and ordered a Conditional Discharge with terms, including medication compliance and abstinence from intoxicants.

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 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 Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for property offences and diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder.

The accused had been residing in the community under a conditional discharge, demonstrating medication compliance, stability, and insight into his illness.

Supported by a joint recommendation from the hospital, the Attorney General, and amicus curiae, the Board applied the Winko test and concluded the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

An absolute discharge was granted pursuant to s. 672.54(a) of the Criminal Code.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to determine whether the accused, who had previously been found unfit to stand trial on assault charges, remained unfit.

Based on the uncontradicted evidence of his treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused's mental health had significantly improved and he was now fit to stand trial.

The Board directed his return to court and declined to make an order under section 672.49 of the Criminal Code to detain him in the hospital pending his return, finding no reasonable grounds to believe he would become unfit in a correctional facility.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief and animal cruelty.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had a history of non-compliance with medication and violence towards animals.

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

The Board ordered a continuation of the Detention Order with expanded privileges, including the possibility of community living in approved accommodation, noting the accused's recent progress and medication adherence while in the hospital.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The treatment team and all parties jointly submitted that while the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to schizophrenia and substance use disorders, his risk could now be managed in the community.

The Board accepted the joint submission, noting the accused's progress, medication adherence, and successful transition to supported housing, and granted a Conditional Discharge subject to conditions including abstaining from intoxicants and residing in supported accommodation.

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

The accused, who has schizophrenia, an intellectual disability, and antisocial personality disorder, had a history of violence and non-compliance.

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

Accepting a joint submission, the Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order but granted additional indirectly supervised hospital and grounds privileges, as well as accompanied community passes, to support his gradual rehabilitation.

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

The accused was readmitted to the hospital after exhibiting bizarre and grandiose behaviour at his annual hearing and submitting an inappropriate letter, which indicated an increase in his risk to public safety.

The hospital initiated a change in his antipsychotic medication to Clozapine, which required close monitoring due to his specific medical conditions.

The Board concluded that both the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty were necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive interventions available to manage his risk and ensure his safety during the medication transition.