Dr. Brian Daly

Mr. Stephens, convicted of mischief and failing to comply with a probation order in 2009, sought to reopen his appeal to argue for a not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (NCR) defence.

He had previously been found NCR for unrelated 2011 offences.

His summary conviction appeal of the 2009 convictions was dismissed in 2014, and subsequent motions to reopen were also dismissed.

He brought a new motion relying on a 2024 psychiatric assessment.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion, finding that the new report lacked the cogency to establish an NCR defence or to justify reopening the appeal, especially given the applicant's own inconsistent factual account of the events.

The accused, C.M.L., was charged with child abduction under s. 282(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.

Throughout her jury trial, she was self-represented and highly disruptive, leading to her repeated exclusion from the courtroom.

The court appointed amici curiae to assist in ensuring a fair trial, including cross-examining a key Crown witness and delivering a jury address on the accused's behalf.

The court also ruled on amendments to the indictment and clarified the meaning of "custody order" under s. 282(1) of the Criminal Code, finding that an interim order requiring the child's return to Ontario constituted a custody order.

The court affirmed the necessity of an expanded role for amici in exceptional cases to prevent a miscarriage of justice, distinguishing it from the Supreme Court's guidance in Ontario v. Criminal Lawyers’ Association of Ontario.