J. McIntyre

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found unfit to stand trial on a charge of manslaughter.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and vascular dementia secondary to a traumatic brain injury.

Based on uncontradicted psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial, is likely permanently unfit, and continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

The Ontario Review Board held a Restriction of Liberty hearing after the accused, who had been living in the community, was readmitted to the hospital.

The hospital presented evidence that the accused had become increasingly unreliable in attending appointments and had tested positive for substances, leading to a deterioration in his mental status.

The Board accepted the medical evidence that the accused was not yet ready to return to the community.

The Board found that the return to hospital was warranted and that his ongoing detention in the hospital was the least onerous and least restrictive decision available.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for various offences including assault with a weapon.

The hospital and the Attorney General sought a continuation of the Detention Order, while amicus curiae for the accused sought a Conditional Discharge.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused continues to experience active symptoms of schizoaffective disorder, complicated by substance use and medication non-compliance.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the Detention Order as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for four counts of attempted murder and assault.

The accused's diagnoses include schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing psychotic symptoms and the risk of substance use relapse.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Disposition with community living privileges.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault and assault with intent to resist arrest.

The accused has treatment-resistant schizophrenia and a major neurocognitive disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public due to the brittle nature of his illness and limited insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention disposition at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, but removed the abstinence and urine drug screening conditions and reduced the minimum reporting frequency, given his stability and lack of substance use history.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for sexual assault in 2009, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for his annual disposition hearing.

The Board found that he continues to suffer from treatment-refractory schizophrenia, lacks insight into his illness, and remains a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on uncontroverted psychiatric evidence, the Board ordered that the accused continue to be detained on a General Forensic Unit at the hospital, with privileges up to living in the community in approved accommodation.

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

The accused, who is aging and frail, did not attend the hearing.

Based on the unanimous recommendation of the hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused's counsel, the Board found that the accused no longer represents a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered an absolute discharge.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for murder after setting a victim on fire on a public transit bus, appeared for his annual review hearing.

The hospital and the accused sought to add a 24-hour supervised community living privilege to his Disposition to facilitate discharge planning.

The Crown opposed.

The Ontario Review Board denied the community living privilege, citing a recent unprovoked violent outburst, the recency of his diagnosis and medication change, and significant public safety concerns.

The Board granted indirectly supervised passes but prohibited the accused from accessing public transit unless accompanied by staff or an approved person.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for manslaughter.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had recently experienced mental state decompensations requiring readmission to the hospital.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the existing disposition, which detains the accused at the hospital with privileges to live in approved supervised community accommodation, continue in force without change.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for threatening death and causing a disturbance.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had shown significant progress over the past year, including medication compliance and abstinence from substances.

However, due to his limited insight into his illness and the recent nature of his stability, the Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the hospital's psychiatric evidence that he remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a continued detention order with expanded privileges, including indirectly supervised passes in the Greater Toronto Area and the potential to reside in approved community accommodation.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault and uttering threats, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual disposition review.

The accused had remained psychiatrically stable in the community for several years, adhered to medication, and maintained employment and pro-social activities.

The treatment team proposed ongoing monitoring by the Forensic Outpatient Service until non-forensic community supports could be established.

Applying the Winko standard, the Board found no positive evidence that the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault and uttering threats.

The accused has diagnoses of Bipolar 1 Disorder and Substance Use Disorder.

The treatment team recommended a conditional discharge, noting the accused's progress, medication compliance, and positive community integration, while emphasizing that an absolute discharge would be premature and destabilizing.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and ordered a conditional discharge with reduced mandatory reporting, in accordance with the joint recommendation of the 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 two counts of sexual assault.

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly submitted that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and that the conditional discharge should be maintained.

The Board accepted the joint submission and the evidence of the treating psychiatrist, finding that the accused's poor insight and history of medication noncompliance posed a high risk of decompensation and violence if absolutely discharged.

The conditional discharge was continued.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review of the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for weapon offences in 2010.

The accused, who suffers from schizophrenia, has maintained medication compliance but remains socially withdrawn and refuses to engage with community psychiatrists.

The Board found that he remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his conditional discharge without change, emphasizing the necessity of ongoing treatment team oversight to prevent relapse.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for assault and related charges.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had made progress but recently struggled with substance use and declined a community housing placement.

Relying on expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to risks of medication non-compliance and substance use if unsupervised.

The Board ordered the continuation of the accused's detention at the hospital with privileges.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review and an initial disposition hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and arson.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and polysubstance use disorder, had made consistent progress in hospital, complying with treatment and abstaining from substances.

Relying on psychiatric evidence and a joint submission, the Board found the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention order with the addition of community living in approved accommodation as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review and a restriction of liberty review for an accused found not criminally responsible for various offences.

The accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, was readmitted to the hospital after being charged with choking his daughter.

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

The Board maintained the detention order with an added condition allowing the hospital to manage contact between the accused and his daughter.

The Board also found that the hospital's decision to readmit the accused was reasonable, warranted, and the least onerous course of action available to manage the elevated risk.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been detained at CAMH but living in the community with his family.

The Board found that while the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, his risk could be managed in the community.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge with conditions including residence, reporting, and consent to treatment, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Crown applied to have Derek Fellows declared a dangerous offender pursuant to section 753(1) of the Criminal Code.

The offender pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 10-year-old boy by luring him into a forest and attempting forced anal intercourse, possessing child pornography, and breaching two court orders prohibiting contact with children.

The offender had a prior conviction in 2005 for repeatedly sexually assaulting a 7-year-old boy and multiple convictions for possessing child pornography.

The court found that all statutory criteria for dangerous offender designation were satisfied and imposed an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment.

Shiloh Pettipas-Lizak pleaded guilty to pointing a firearm at his girlfriend.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the domestic context, the presence of children, the sustained nature of the threat, and the victim's lasting psychological harm, alongside mitigating factors such as the offender's genuine remorse, significant rehabilitative efforts over six years, stable employment, sobriety, and reconnection with his children.

The court found that a conditional sentence was appropriate given the unique circumstances, including the judicial error that led to separate sentencing proceedings.

A conditional sentence of 21 months was imposed, with house arrest for the first seven months, followed by a curfew, along with other conditions, a lifetime section 109 order, and a DNA order.