6 total
Detention order continued for NCR accused who remains a significant threat to public safety.
The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm.
The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and substance use disorder, continued to experience grandiose and persecutory delusions, lacked insight into his illness, and engaged in rule-breaking behaviour.
The Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his detention order, adding a condition that he reside in supervised accommodation when living in the community.
Board orders transfer of NCR accused to maximum secure facility due to escalating violent behaviour.
The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder, underwent an annual review by the Ontario Review Board.
Following a period of stability, the accused's behaviour severely deteriorated, resulting in assaults, threats to kill hospital staff, and the need for mechanical restraints and seclusion.
The treatment team recommended an urgent transfer to a maximum secure facility.
The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to emotional dysregulation, treatment non-compliance, and aggressive behaviour.
The Board ordered the accused's transfer to a high secure facility under a Detention Order, concluding it was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition available to manage the acute risk.
NCR accused with treatment-refractory schizophrenia found to pose significant threat; detention order imposed.
The accused was found not criminally responsible for sexual interference, criminal harassment, and sexual assault.
The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to make a disposition.
The Board accepted the joint submission and the unchallenged psychiatric evidence that the accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia and experiences offence-paralleling delusions, poses a significant threat to public safety.
The Board ordered a detention order with privileges up to and including community living in approved accommodation to allow for inpatient treatment, medication optimization, and rehabilitative programming.
Hospital's restriction of NCRMD patient's liberty following positive cocaine test deemed necessary and appropriate.
The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, was detained at a psychiatric hospital.
After testing positive for cocaine in breach of his disposition, the hospital significantly restricted his privileges.
The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberty.
The Board found that the restriction was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous option to manage the increased risk of psychosis and harm to others caused by the accused's substance use.
Accused found fit to stand trial and returned to court with a Keep Fit Order.
The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on several criminal charges, including robbery and assault with a weapon.
The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to determine his current fitness.
Based on the evidence of his treating psychiatrist, the Board found that the accused now understands the charges, plea options, and the roles of trial participants, and can meaningfully instruct counsel.
The Board concluded the accused is fit to stand trial and ordered him returned to court with a Keep Fit Order and a Detention Order.
Detention Order imposed for NCR accused; abstinence clause rejected due to lack of substance use evidence.
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.
No linked lawyers found.
No linked judges found.