Julie A. Zamprogna

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 conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, autism spectrum disorder, and intellectual developmental disorder, had successfully transitioned to a staff-supported community group home during the reporting period.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the detention disposition be maintained, as the accused requires continuous supervision and medication prompts, but expanded his geographic privileges to include Southern and Southwestern Ontario.

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 held an annual review hearing to determine whether the accused, who has schizophrenia and a history of complex delusions, was fit to stand trial.

The hospital and the Crown argued he remained unfit due to his belief that the legal system was rigged against him.

Applying the Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision in Bharwani, the Board found that while the accused held delusional beliefs, they did not overwhelm his ability to make decisions regarding his defence or instruct counsel.

The Board concluded the accused was fit to stand trial and directed that he be returned to court.

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.

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

The accused, diagnosed with bipolar I disorder and substance use disorder, experienced multiple decompensations and hospital readmissions due to medication non-compliance and substance use.

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

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order with modifications, including the removal of out-of-province travel passes and a transfer to St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton to facilitate community reintegration and proximity to family support.

The Hospital sought an early hearing before the Ontario Review Board, arguing that the accused, previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault, was now fit.

The accused's attending psychiatrist testified that his symptoms of schizophrenia and possible Huntington's Disease had improved significantly with clozapine, restoring his ability to understand the proceedings and instruct counsel.

The Board accepted this undisputed evidence and found the accused fit to stand trial.

The Board ordered him returned to court and noted that he would remain detained at the hospital under the existing disposition pending the court's determination of his fitness, making a separate 'keep fit' order unnecessary.

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

The accused had been found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his brittle schizophrenia and history of substance use.

Noting his progress and five years of sobriety, the Board continued the conditional discharge but removed the strict requirement to abstain from intoxicants, while maintaining random testing and the requirement to notify the hospital of absences over 24 hours.

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

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and assault, is diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder.

The Board heard evidence from his attending psychiatrist that while positive symptoms are controlled, negative symptoms and stressors remain.

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

The conditional discharge was continued with minor variations, including the removal of the weapons prohibition.

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

The accused, who suffers from treatment-refractory schizophrenia, had been living in a supervised community residence and sought a Conditional Discharge.

The Hospital and the Attorney General sought a continued Detention Order, arguing it was necessary to manage his risk and ensure a quick return to the hospital if he decompensated.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety but concluded that his risk could be safely managed under a Conditional Discharge.

The Board imposed conditions including a specified residence, medication adherence, and Young clauses requiring him to return to the hospital for assessment or admission if directed.

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

The accused suffers from clozapine-resistant schizophrenia and a severe substance use disorder, having recently relapsed into methamphetamine use.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order, with a modification to allow indirectly supervised privileges to facilitate the accused's participation in a residential drug and alcohol treatment program.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and sexual interference.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and the evidence of the attending psychiatrist that the accused continues to experience active, treatment-resistant symptoms of schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his Detention Order without changes.