J. Huber

The accused, previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of attempted murder, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review.

The Board heard evidence from her attending psychiatrist that she continues to struggle with cognitive deficits and emotional regulation, but that her symptoms may be related to complex trauma rather than a permanent intellectual disability.

The Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial, but declined to find her permanently unfit.

The Board ordered that the current detention disposition at the hospital remains necessary and appropriate, with privileges to live in approved accommodation in Ontario.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including robbery with a weapon, was subject to an annual review and a Restriction of Liberty (ROL) hearing.

After a period of residing in the community, the accused's mental status decompensated following a reduction in antipsychotic medication and a return to substance use, leading to her readmission to the hospital.

The Ontario Review Board found that the readmission was warranted and the least restrictive option available.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of her Detention Order, with the addition of a clause requiring her to abstain from alcohol and other substances.

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

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for break and enter with intent, is currently detained at a forensic mental health centre.

The parties presented a joint submission that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and that the current detention disposition should continue.

The Board accepted the joint submission, noting the accused's history of violence, substance abuse, and need for a high level of structure and supervision to maintain recent improvements and prevent decompensation.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm.

The accused, who has schizophrenia, had been living in a long-term care home and demonstrated improved behaviour and medication adherence, though he continued to experience residual symptoms.

The Board accepted the joint submission that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety, noting his stable living situation, the involvement of a specialized geriatric mental health team, and the availability of the Mental Health Act if future decompensation occurred.

An absolute discharge was granted.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for mischief and failing to comply with a release order.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, substance use disorder, and an acquired brain injury, had been living in the community under a detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to the risk of rapid decompensation and violence if he relapses into substance use.

The Board ordered a continuation of the detention disposition but removed the abstain and residential treatment clauses and reduced reporting requirements to assess his internal motivation to maintain abstinence.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault, was subject to a detention disposition at a psychiatric hospital.

The hospital significantly restricted his indirectly supervised community privileges after he exhibited intimidating behaviour toward a clinician and engaged in a pattern of inappropriate sexual and interpersonal conduct.

The Ontario Review Board held a restriction of liberty hearing and found that the increased restrictions were necessary and appropriate to manage his risk while the treatment team worked to address his behaviours.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and other offences.

The accused, who has a history of substance-induced psychosis, had transitioned to less structured housing and remained stable on medication.

The hospital recommended continuing the detention disposition with reduced reporting requirements.

The Board agreed, finding the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and required ongoing support and supervision before independent living or a conditional discharge could be considered.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for invitation to sexual touching and break and enter, was subject to a mandatory annual Review Board hearing.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to schizoaffective disorder, substance use disorder, and intellectual disability.

However, noting his stability, abstinence, and voluntary hospitalization during a period of stress, the Board ordered a conditional discharge with conditions including residence at an approved group home and abstention from substances.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder, was subject to a mandatory annual review hearing before the Ontario Review Board.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his bipolar disorder with psychotic features and the risk of relapse.

The Board ordered a continuation of his detention disposition at the hospital, with expanded privileges to allow for gradual reintegration into his community.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his schizophrenia, substance use disorders, and risk of decompensation if unsupervised.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention disposition with the addition of indirectly supervised passes, as jointly recommended by the parties, to support his reintegration into the community.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty imposed on an accused who was previously found unfit to stand trial and detained at a forensic mental health hospital.

The hospital had placed the accused in seclusion and reduced his privileges after he experienced decompensation and psychotic symptoms due to medication changes and the progression of Huntington's disease.

Applying the framework from Campbell (Re), the Board found that the reduction in privileges constituted a significant restriction of liberty.

However, the Board concluded that the restriction was reasonable, warranted, and the least onerous course of action available to manage the accused's risk until he stabilized following further medication adjustments.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and assault with a weapon.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had made progress and transitioned to a supervised community group home but breached a no-contact clause by repeatedly contacting his wife.

The Board found that the accused lacked insight into his violence risk and the impact of his offences on his family.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered a continuation of the detention disposition with an amended no-contact clause to allow for family court proceedings.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the conditional discharge of an accused found not criminally responsible for dangerous operation of a vehicle, break and enter, and assault.

The accused, diagnosed with bipolar disorder, had demonstrated significant improvements in medication compliance, insight, and psychiatric stability over the reporting period.

Applying the test from Winko, the Board concluded that the evidence no longer established that the accused posed a significant threat to public safety.

Consequently, the Board ordered an absolute discharge.

The accused, a 71-year-old woman with a severe traumatic brain injury, was charged with assault with a weapon against her husband.

She was previously found unfit to stand trial.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing to determine her fitness and appropriate disposition.

Relying on psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to cognitive impairments that prevent her from understanding the proceedings or instructing counsel.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge, requiring her to reside at her current supervised seniors residence, have no contact with her husband without consent, and attend the hospital for assessment if directed, balancing public safety with her reintegration and needs.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for breaking and entering.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and substance use disorder, had remained stable and abstinent in the community for over a year.

The Board found the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety but concluded a conditional discharge was the necessary and appropriate disposition.

The Board rejected a joint submission to include an admission condition, finding it was not the least onerous and least restrictive option given the accused's stability and history of cooperation.

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

The accused, diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, has been detained at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care.

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

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention disposition with a minor modification to allow community access accompanied by an approved delegate agency.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for robbery and other offences.

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, and Substance Use Disorder, had experienced periods of instability and substance relapse during the review period but recently showed improved insight and medication adherence.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties and the uncontroverted expert evidence of the treating psychiatrist.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered a detention disposition with an increase in 72-hour passes and an expanded geographic area for privileges.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder due to schizophrenia.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, necessitating a detention disposition.

However, noting the accused's significant progress, medication compliance, and stability in the community, the Board liberalized his privileges.

This included removing a prohibition on entering the city where the index offence occurred, allowing for a measured assessment of his stability in that environment while still under the Board's jurisdiction.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for arson.

The accused had made significant progress in hospital, adhering to medication and remaining abstinent from substances, following a new diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

However, the Board accepted expert evidence that the accused remained stress-vulnerable, lacked insight, and posed a significant threat to public safety if decompensated.

The Board ordered a Detention Disposition with expanded pass privileges to support his reintegration goals.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson due to a mental disorder.

At the initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the parties jointly recommended a conditional discharge.

The Board accepted the expert risk assessment indicating the accused's risk of violence is low when abstinent and supported, but that he remains vulnerable to relapse.

Finding that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, the Board ordered a conditional discharge with terms requiring abstinence from intoxicants, testing, and ongoing psychiatric treatment.