Jessica R. Szabo

The appellant challenged an Ontario Review Board disposition continuing his detention under Part XX.1 of the Criminal Code after an NCR finding.

He argued that the Board gave insufficient reasons on significant threat and failed to use its inquisitorial powers to test defence counsel's concession that he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Court of Appeal held that the reasons were sufficient when read in light of the hospital report, the treating psychiatrist's evidence, and the uncontested record showing a link between substance use, psychiatric decompensation, and risk of criminal offending.

The court further held that the Board was not required to make additional inquiries where the position advanced was supported by evidence and had been independently considered by the Board.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of liberties imposed on the accused, a patient at a mental health centre.

The hospital had suspended the accused's privileges and transferred him to a secure unit following medication non-compliance, decompensation, and aggressive behaviour.

The Board found that the initial restrictions and transfer were necessary, appropriate, and the least restrictive options available at the time.

However, the Board concluded that the ongoing restrictions ceased to be necessary and appropriate in the days leading up to the hearing, as the accused had stabilized and returned to baseline.

The Board directed that the accused be transferred back to a general ward and that less restrictive measures be enabled.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for threatening death and criminal harassment, underwent an annual review of her hospital detention disposition.

The Ontario Review Board found that she continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to her schizoaffective disorder and history of elopement.

The Board ordered her continued detention at the hospital with privileges, noting that while she is ready for community living, she requires 24-hour supervision, which could include long-term care or other supervised housing options.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and weapons offences.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizophrenia, had transitioned to injectable medication and his psychotic symptoms were in remission.

However, relying on uncontroverted psychiatric evidence, the Board found he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety due to residual psychosis and cognitive deficits.

The Board ordered a continued detention disposition at the hospital, with added privileges for travel with an approved person.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for sexual assault.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia, mild neurocognitive disorder, and cannabis use disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

While all parties agreed to add a community living provision to the detention disposition, the hospital and the accused argued for 'accommodation approved by the person in charge' to maximize flexibility.

The Board rejected this, accepting the attending psychiatrist's evidence that the accused requires the highest levels of supervision.

The Board ordered a detention disposition with community living in supervised accommodation.

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

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for serious driving offences resulting in death, suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused lacks insight, requires supervision for medication adherence, and would pose a significant risk of serious harm if granted an absolute discharge.

The Board concluded the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for various violent offences.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and panic disorder, had made significant progress in hospital but remained vulnerable to stress and rapid decompensation.

Relying on uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to limited insight and a history of treatment-resistant illness.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order to ensure a safe and structured transition to complex care housing when available.

The appellant, previously found not criminally responsible for careless storage of a firearm, appealed an Ontario Review Board disposition ordering his continued detention at a mental health centre.

The appellant argued he no longer posed a significant risk to the public and sought an absolute or conditional discharge.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the Board's decision reasonable and supported by unchallenged psychiatric evidence that the appellant minimized his offence, refused to discuss concerning writings, and had an uncertain commitment to medication.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and theft.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, polysubstance use disorder, and antisocial personality disorder, was residing in the community under a detention order.

The Board found that the accused lacks insight into his mental illness, the need for treatment, and the gravity of his index offences.

Applying the Winko framework, the Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention order with discretionary community living privileges.

The appellant, who was previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder, appealed a detention order made by the Ontario Review Board.

She argued the Board failed to adequately consider her proposal for a conditional discharge that included a 'Young clause' and treatment compliance conditions.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the Board must meaningfully consider whether the proposed conditions could practically and effectively address the risk to the public, and remitted the matter for a new hearing.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for multiple violent offences.

The accused, who has a moderate intellectual disability and a history of behavioural dysregulation, had been readmitted to a secure forensic unit after setting false fire alarms at a group home.

The Board accepted the unanimous opinion of the clinical team and the joint submission of counsel that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the present Detention Order, while encouraging ongoing efforts to find a suitable high-support community placement.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review and a Restriction of Liberty (ROL) hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for firearms and assault offences.

The hospital had transferred the accused to a secure forensic unit due to substance use, rule violations, and medication non-compliance.

The Board found that the initial and ongoing restriction of liberty was warranted and necessary to manage the accused's risk.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to predictable medication non-adherence, heavy cannabis use, and rapid psychotic relapse.

The Board ordered the accused's continued detention at the hospital, with provisions for an updated Gladue Report and potential attendance at an Indigenous residential treatment centre.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and failing to comply with conditions.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, sought the removal of disposition clauses restricting his internet and cannabis use.

The Board accepted the treating psychiatrist's evidence that the accused's cannabis use leads to aggression and decompensation, and that internet restrictions are necessary to manage his risk.

The Board found the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered his continued detention within the Forensic Service at Ontario Shores.

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

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for sexual assault, had a successful year in the community with his schizophrenia in remission.

The treatment team recommended removing the residence and substance abstinence conditions to foster independence.

The Board found that while the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, the proposed variations would not increase his risk.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with the requested conditions removed.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition pursuant to s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault, is currently subject to a discharge with conditions.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his diagnoses of schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, ongoing substance use, and recent incidents of aggression while in hospital.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current disposition, finding it to be the least restrictive and least onerous option necessary to manage the risk.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and failing to comply with an undertaking.

The accused suffers from schizoaffective disorder and lacks insight into his illness, though he has recently maintained stability and employment while compliant with long-acting injectable medication.

The Board found the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to the risk of medication noncompliance and symptom exacerbation.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge to allow the treatment team to transition his care to a non-forensic community team, specifically declining to impose a mandatory treatment condition to test his voluntary compliance.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for firearms offences and was subject to a disposition.

At his annual review hearing, the Ontario Review Board considered whether he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The evidence indicated that his schizophrenia was well managed with medication, he had good insight into his need for treatment, and he was closely monitored by a community ACT team.

The Board concluded that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public and granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault and assaulting a peace officer.

The accused had successfully transitioned to independent living in the community but continued to require the support of the forensic system, including daily visits from an ACT team.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered a Detention Order Disposition with the same terms and conditions as the previous disposition, as requested by all parties.

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

The accused had previously been found not criminally responsible for assault and failing to comply with probation.

Based on a joint submission and uncontroverted expert evidence, the Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to the risk of substance use relapse triggered by negative peer influences.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The accused, who suffers from Bipolar 1 Disorder and cognitive impairment, was previously subject to a Detention Order at Providence Care Hospital.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused lacks insight into his condition and requires strict supervision to maintain medication adherence and alcohol abstinence.

The Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order.