Dr. Sheppard

The accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault of a minor, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing.

The Board accepted uncontradicted psychiatric evidence that the accused remains unfit due to a major mental illness, likely schizophrenia, and requires active hospital treatment.

Given the severe risk to public safety and the lack of community supports, the Board ordered the accused detained at the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, with a transfer to the North Bay Health Centre pending bed availability in Thunder Bay.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for violent offences committed against his partner while experiencing active symptoms of schizophrenia.

At his annual Review Board hearing, the hospital and the Crown submitted that he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety but recommended amending his detention order to allow community living anywhere in Northwestern Ontario.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that, despite his recent progress and medication compliance, the accused remains a significant threat due to his history of relapses and non-compliance.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order with the requested amendment to his community living privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges including uttering threats, criminal harassment, and assault.

Relying on psychiatric evidence, the Board concluded the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to cognitive and language impairments.

The Board ordered that the accused be detained at the hospital with privileges up to living in the community in approved accommodation, subject to conditions including a weapons prohibition and no-contact orders.

The accused was referred to the Ontario Review Board after being found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault.

The accused suffers from a moderate developmental delay and schizoaffective disorder.

The Board unanimously found the accused unfit to stand trial, noting his inability to understand the judicial process or communicate effectively with counsel due to his mental disorder.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to protect public safety, with conditions including no contact with the victims and monthly reporting to the hospital.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and possession of stolen property, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended continuing the conditional discharge.

Relying on the treating psychiatrist's evidence that the accused lacks insight, is externally motivated to take medication, and would likely relapse into alcohol abuse and destabilize if discharged absolutely, the Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The conditional discharge was continued, and an early review within six months was ordered to allow for a fulsome risk assessment.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual interference and sexual assault.

The hospital, Crown, and defence jointly submitted that the accused remains unfit, is likely permanently unfit, and continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted psychiatric evidence and ordered that the accused remain subject to a Conditional Discharge with the existing terms, declining to recommend a stay of proceedings.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including attempt murder and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

The accused suffers from a major neurocognitive disorder and aphasia following a stroke, rendering him unable to meaningfully participate in a trial.

Based on the uncontroverted expert evidence of his attending psychiatrist and the joint position of the parties, the Board found that the accused remains unfit and continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's conditional discharge.

The accused had previously been found unfit to stand trial on charges including criminal harassment and public mischief.

The hospital and all parties recommended a continuation of the conditional discharge, as the accused's severe anxiety prevented a meaningful fitness assessment, though he could not be deemed permanently unfit.

The Board accepted the evidence, found the accused remains unfit to stand trial, and ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review of his detention disposition.

The hospital and Crown recommended continuing the detention disposition with increased travel passes, while the accused sought a conditional discharge.

The Board accepted the hospital's uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, history of violence, and risk of decompensation if unsupervised.

The Board ordered a continuation of the detention disposition with added conditions prohibiting cannabis use.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused who was previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of sexual assault.

The hospital and the Crown submitted that the accused remains unfit to stand trial and continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, recommending a continuation of the conditional discharge.

The accused's counsel accepted that the accused is likely permanently unfit.

The Board accepted the medical evidence that the accused suffers from dementia and significant medical issues, and remains a significant threat to public safety due to a history of inappropriate sexual touching.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge.

The appellant was found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and was detained at a secure forensic unit.

The Ontario Review Board granted a conditional discharge, concluding the appellant remained a significant threat to public safety despite the hospital's recommendation for an absolute discharge.

The appellant appealed.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the Board's decision unreasonable as the evidence did not support a finding of significant risk to the public.

An absolute discharge was substituted.

The appellant appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board, which found he posed a significant threat to public safety and denied him an absolute discharge.

The hospital and treatment team supported an absolute discharge, noting that while the appellant suffered from schizophrenia, he was not violent and could be managed under the civil mental health system.

The Court of Appeal found the Board's decision unreasonable, as it relied on speculative correlations between drug use, mental illness symptoms, and risk to the public, while ignoring the unique circumstances of the index offence and the appellant's lack of violent history.

The appeal was allowed and an absolute discharge was substituted.

The appellant, who had a long-standing history of mental illness, was found NCRMD on a charge of assault with a weapon after chasing his neighbour with a pick axe.

At his initial hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the Board ordered his detention in a secure forensic unit.

The appellant appealed, arguing for a conditional discharge.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the Board did not give adequate consideration to whether a conditional discharge was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition in the circumstances, and directed the Board to reconsider its decision.

The Crown appealed a conditional sentence of two years less a day imposed on the respondent following a two-day armed standoff with police.

The respondent pleaded guilty to possessing a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace and possessing a firearm while prohibited.

The Court of Appeal found that while the sentencing judge erred and a custodial sentence was initially warranted, the respondent's successful compliance with the conditional sentence and significant rehabilitative progress over the past five and a half months meant that a custodial sentence was no longer in the interests of justice.

The appeal was dismissed.

The appellant, who was found not criminally responsible by reason of insanity in 1981, appealed the Ontario Review Board's decision refusing him an absolute discharge.

The Board had concluded he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety due to concerns about alcohol abuse and personality disorder.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the Board's decision unreasonable as it was contrary to the evidence of his treatment team and unsupported by the record.

The court set aside the Board's order and granted the appellant an absolute discharge.

The Crown appealed an order directing that a young person charged with first degree murder be tried in youth court.

Applying the transfer framework under s. 16 of the Young Offenders Act, the court held that the inquiry required an assessment of whether public protection and rehabilitation could likely be reconciled within the youth court disposition regime.

Despite the gravity of the alleged planned and deliberate murder and the respondent's age, the evidence supported findings that the respondent did not suffer from a conduct disorder, had shown positive institutional adjustment, and had realistic rehabilitative prospects within the available 10-year secure disposition.

The appeal was dismissed and the youth court order was confirmed.