The accused, C.M.L., was convicted of child abduction and the Crown sought a fitness assessment for sentencing.
Two psychiatrists opined she was unfit due to delusional disorder affecting her ability to communicate with counsel or represent herself.
The court, applying the "limited cognitive capacity" test from R. v. Taylor and R. v. Whittle, found that C.M.L. understood the proceedings and their consequences, and was capable of communicating with counsel but chose not to.
Her disruptive behaviour and refusal to cooperate were deemed deliberate strategies rather than indicators of unfitness.
The court concluded there were no reasonable grounds to find her unfit for sentencing and proceeded with the sentencing hearing.
