J. Kevin Wright

The accused was found not criminally responsible (NCR) for multiple counts of mischief after damaging religious property while experiencing psychosis.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the Board found that he continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of rapid decompensation when non-compliant with medication.

However, noting his current stability, insight into his illness, and strong family support, the Board accepted a joint submission and ordered a conditional discharge with conditions including weekly reporting and abstention from intoxicants.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for several violent offences and was subject to a conditional discharge.

At his annual review hearing under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code, the Ontario Review Board considered whether he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board found that while the accused had made gains and his schizophrenia was in remission with medication, his ongoing cannabis use and need for oversight meant he still posed a significant threat.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge with reduced reporting conditions.

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and uttering threats.

At her annual Review Board hearing, the majority found she no longer poses a significant threat to public safety, noting she has been stable in the community without antipsychotic medication for 18 months and has not reoffended.

The Board granted an absolute discharge.

The Board also found that a recent hospital readmission that restricted her liberty was not reasonable or necessary to manage public safety.

A dissenting member concluded the accused remains a significant risk due to ongoing psychotic symptoms, non-adherence to medication, and stated intentions to contact the victim.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following findings of not criminally responsible for uttering threats.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had transitioned to independent living but continued to struggle with cannabis use and disengagement from his treatment team during periods of stress.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, noting recent behaviours resembling his index offences.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order to ensure the hospital maintains authority over his treatment and accommodation.

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

The accused, who has a schizophrenia spectrum disorder and a history of substance abuse, had made significant progress over the past year, including transitioning to independent living and maintaining abstinence from substances.

Relying on the uncontroverted evidence of the hospital, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, as he would likely disengage from treatment and relapse without a disposition.

However, given his progress, the Board concluded that the risk could now be managed with a conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to readmit the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible, to the Crisis Unit following a mental health decompensation triggered by cannabis use.

The Board applied the Campbell framework and found that the readmission constituted a significant increase in the restriction of his liberty, but that it was reasonable, warranted, and the least restrictive course of action available to manage his risk.

The Board also granted the hospital's request to remove the residence specification from the accused's conditional discharge disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for robbery and failing to comply with probation.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and substance use disorders.

The parties presented a joint position supporting a continued detention disposition with reduced reporting requirements.

Applying the Winko framework, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety, primarily due to the risk of substance relapse and stressors related to transitioning to independent housing.

The Board ordered a Detention Disposition as the necessary and appropriate measure to protect the public while accommodating the accused's reintegration needs.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to transfer the accused from the Forensic Rehabilitation Unit to the Forensic Assessment Unit, constituting a restriction of liberty.

The transfer was precipitated by the accused's substance use and medication non-compliance.

The Board found that the initial restriction of liberty was warranted to stabilize the accused's mental status and manage risk.

However, because the hospital would have transferred the accused back to the rehabilitation unit if a bed were available, the continued placement in the assessment unit no longer constituted the least onerous and least restrictive placement.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon, was transferred from the community to a locked forensic unit due to high-risk behaviours and substance use.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing under s. 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code to review this restriction of liberty.

The Board accepted uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused's medications required adjustment and appropriate housing had not been identified.

The Board unanimously determined that the restriction of liberty was necessary and appropriate, and ordered a continued detention disposition.

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

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and multiple substance use disorders.

The hospital, the Attorney-General, and the accused jointly proposed maintaining a detention disposition.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted evidence of the treating psychiatrist that the accused's fluctuating engagement with treatment and ongoing substance use pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention disposition to manage the risk while supporting the accused's reintegration and treatment needs.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for offences including assault with a weapon and uttering threats.

The hospital's representative and treating psychiatrist provided uncontroverted expert evidence that the accused's bipolar disorder is in full remission, he is compliant with medication, and he has strong community support.

The Board applied the Winko test and concluded that the accused no longer poses a significant threat to public safety.

An absolute discharge was granted.

The hospital requested an early review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible, seeking to allow him to travel internationally for a family wedding.

The Ontario Review Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety due to the recency and seriousness of the index offences, and continued his conditional discharge.

The Board declined to vary the disposition, clarifying that the existing conditions—including a requirement to reside at a specific address and report bi-weekly—did not prohibit short-term international travel.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder and indignity to a dead body.

The Board found that the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and ordered his continued detention at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre.

However, noting the accused's stability, medication compliance, and abstinence from cannabis, the Board granted a community living privilege, specifically approving his transition to Lebreton Transitional Housing, an 8-hour supervised facility.

The appellant, Justin Williams, appealed his conviction for assault, arguing that the trial judge made unreasonable findings of fact or credibility and misapprehended his evidence.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice found that the trial judge’s findings were open to him on the record, that there was no palpable and overriding error, and that the trial judge provided comprehensive reasons for rejecting the defences of consent and self-defence.

The appeal was dismissed.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible, was detained at a psychiatric hospital.

Following unprovoked assaults on a co-patient and staff, the hospital placed the accused in locked seclusion and notified the Ontario Review Board.

The Board applied the Campbell framework and concluded that the significant increase in the restriction of the accused's liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous measure available to protect public safety.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for criminal harassment and other offences, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an annual review of his conditional discharge.

The treatment team and all parties jointly submitted that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety, citing his sustained abstinence from substances, adherence to antipsychotic medication, and improved insight into his schizophrenia.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding that the accused's progress and protective pro-social relationships mitigated any risk.

The accused was granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for sexual assault, criminal harassment, and indecent acts.

The accused suffers from treatment-resistant schizophrenia and a cannabis use disorder.

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

While the Board agreed that a detention disposition was necessary, it modified the community living privilege to require 24/7 supervised accommodations, finding that the accused's ongoing symptoms, lack of insight, and risk of rapid decompensation necessitated strict supervision to ensure public safety.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had a history of medication noncompliance and substance use leading to psychotic symptoms and aggression.

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

A detention order was issued, including conditions to abstain from alcohol and cannabis and to submit to substance testing, to manage her risk during a gradual reintegration into the community.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and alcohol use disorder, remained compliant with medication but continued to abuse alcohol, posing a risk of decompensation.

The Board found the accused continued to represent a significant threat to public safety.

Accepting a joint submission, the Board continued the detention disposition at the secure forensic unit while granting extended privileges for travel abroad to visit family, subject to hospital approval, to motivate further therapeutic engagement.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a significant restriction of the accused's liberties following his readmission to the hospital.

The accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for an indecent act, had decompensated due to medication noncompliance and substance use while living in a group home.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties that the readmission to the hospital was justified, necessary, and the least onerous and least restrictive option available to manage the elevating risk.