James Hammond

The appellant, who was previously found not criminally responsible, appealed a decision of the Ontario Review Board that continued his detention at a mental health facility.

The hospital had significantly increased restrictions on his liberty after he tested positive for illicit drugs and exhibited deteriorating mental health.

The Board conducted a combined restrictions review and annual review, concluding that the appellant posed a significant threat to public safety and that his ongoing detention was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board applied the correct legal standards and that its conclusions were reasonable and supported by the evidence.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Ontario Review Board granting him a conditional discharge rather than an absolute discharge.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Board's decision was not unreasonable given the evidence and the agreement of all parties that the appellant continued to pose a significant risk to the public.

The Court noted the appellant's progress on new medication but held that consideration of an absolute discharge or Community Treatment Order was premature on the current record.

The Crown appealed a decision of the Ontario Review Board granting an absolute discharge to an accused found not criminally responsible.

The accused had twice attempted to grab a police officer's gun during suicidal episodes.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the Board erred in law by placing an onus on the hospital to prove the accused posed a significant risk to the public.

The Court also held that the Board's conclusion that the accused did not pose a significant risk was unreasonable, speculative, and contrary to the uncontradicted expert psychiatric evidence regarding her impulsivity and lack of insight.

The appellant appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board directing his detention at a minimum secure unit, subject to living in the community at the hospital's discretion.

The appellant sought an absolute or conditional discharge.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Board's conclusion that the appellant posed a significant risk to public safety was supported by evidence of his lack of insight, need for medication, and risk of drug use.

The Court held that a detention disposition was necessary to ensure the hospital's continued authority to manage his risk and compel his return if his condition deteriorated.

The appellant appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the Board's order was not unreasonable and noting that any progress made by the appellant could be considered at his next review hearing.

The appellant, an aboriginal man found not criminally responsible (NCR) on account of mental disorder, appealed a disposition of the Ontario Review Board ordering his continued detention.

The appellant argued the Board erred in finding he remained a significant threat to public safety and failed to adequately consider his aboriginal background.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that while the Board has a positive duty to ensure unique factors associated with aboriginal accused are considered under section 672.54 of the Criminal Code, the failure to elicit more information in this case did not amount to a reversible error.