J. Boss

The accused was found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and referred to the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had decompensated while at the hospital, refusing medication and exhibiting increasingly violent behaviour towards staff, resulting in extended periods of seclusion.

The hospital and the Crown recommended a transfer to a higher security facility.

The Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety but concluded a transfer was premature pending an upcoming Consent and Capacity Board hearing regarding his capacity to consent to treatment.

The Board ordered the accused's continued detention at the current hospital with specific conditions.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, mischief, and robbery.

The Board found that while the accused had made significant progress, including abstaining from substances for two years and maintaining employment, he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his major mental illness and vulnerability to substance use relapse.

The Board ordered a conditional discharge, removing the strict abstinence condition but maintaining testing to monitor his transition into the community.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for assault and weapons offences in 2003.

The accused has diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder and cannabis use disorder.

Following a period of decompensation and re-hospitalization due to medication non-adherence and cannabis use, the accused stabilized and returned to a supervised group home.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, supported by the attending psychiatrist, that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order at the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre.

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 hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm.

The accused, diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, continues to experience positive and negative symptoms and lacks insight.

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

A request to transfer the accused to CAMH was declined, as it was opposed by the accused and lacked therapeutic benefit.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order at the Brockville Mental Health Centre as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm, mischief, and robbery.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and substance use disorders, had made positive progress in transitional housing, maintaining sobriety and medication compliance.

However, given his history of rapid relapse and decompensation, the Board found he continues to represent a significant threat to public safety.

The Board concluded that a conditional discharge was premature and ordered the continuation of a detention disposition with privileges to ensure public safety and monitor his transition into the community.

The defendant applied for a bail review under s. 520 of the Criminal Code after being denied bail on the tertiary ground for charges related to an armed home invasion.

The reviewing judge found that new evidence, including an enhanced bail plan and the arrest of another suspect, met the Palmer criteria for admission.

The judge also found that the original bail judge erred by failing to consider the defendant's Charter right to reasonable bail and by overstating the gravity of the offence and the strength of the Crown's case.

Concluding that detention was not necessary to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice, the court granted the bail review and ordered the defendant's release on strict conditions.