Michael Feindel

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and a personality disorder, had been living in the community on a conditional discharge.

The treatment team, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly submitted that the conditional discharge should be maintained.

The Board accepted the joint submission, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and that continuing the conditional discharge is the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory review of the conditional discharge of an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The accused sought an absolute discharge, arguing he had been stable in the community for years without violence.

The hospital and Crown sought a continuation of the conditional discharge, presenting psychiatric evidence that the accused's stability relied entirely on externally mandated medication, without which his severe persecutory delusions would return and escalate his risk of violence.

The Board found the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for offences including assaulting a police officer.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had made significant progress in the community but continued to lack full insight into his illness and need for support.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the hospital's recommendation, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of his conditional discharge with amended conditions to facilitate a transition to more independent housing while maintaining necessary supervision.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had been living in transitional housing in the community and remained generally stable and medication compliant.

However, recent incidents of inappropriate public behaviour raised concerns.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the treating psychiatrist that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a detention order at the hospital with privileges up to and including living in approved accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found unfit to stand trial on weapons charges.

The accused's treating physician testified that despite treatment with clozapine, the accused remains unable to discuss the consequences of a trial.

The Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial and ordered the continuation of a Detention Order at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health with privileges to live in the community in approved accommodation.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges of failing to comply with a recognizance.

The accused suffers from major neurocognitive disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and expressive aphasia following a stroke.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the hospital's evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to unpredictable and aggressive behaviour stemming from his neurocognitive deficits.

The Board also found that the accused remains unfit to stand trial, as his severe communication barriers prevent him from instructing counsel or conducting a defence.

The Board ordered his continued detention at the forensic hospital.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for violent offences, underwent an annual review of his Conditional Discharge by the Ontario Review Board.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly recommended continuing the Conditional Discharge, with the Attorney General requesting the removal of an address notification condition that conflicted with a residency requirement.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but that the threat can be managed in the community with the modified Conditional Discharge.

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

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

Despite periods of stability, the accused recently decompensated due to cannabis use, 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 a continuation of the Detention Order on a General Forensic Unit.

The Ontario Review Board held a Restriction of Liberty hearing after the accused, who had been living in the community under an approved accommodation, was returned to the hospital due to behavioural disturbances and substance use.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused all agreed that the return to the hospital was warranted and represented the least onerous and least restrictive decision available.

The Board accepted the evidence and confirmed the hospital's decision to detain the accused.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review and restriction of liberty hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and forcible confinement.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, had been readmitted to the hospital twice due to rapid mental deterioration and cannabis use.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the detention order with amendments to accommodation requirements.

The Board also found that the hospital readmissions were significant restrictions of liberty but were necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous measures available.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for robbery, attempted break and enter, and aggravated assault.

The Ontario Review Board held a disposition hearing under s. 672.47(1) of the Criminal Code.

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

The Board ordered the accused detained at the Secure Forensic Service of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health with conditions, including a prohibition from being within 500 meters of the index offences' location, and denied indirectly supervised passes.

The accused was found not criminally responsible (NCR) on multiple counts of assault and threatening.

At the initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the panel reviewed psychiatric reports indicating the accused suffers from schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, lacks insight, and experiences grandiose and paranoid delusions.

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

A detention order was issued with discretionary privileges, including accompanied passes on hospital grounds and escorted passes in the community.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty imposed on the accused, who had previously been found not criminally responsible for weapons offences.

The accused was readmitted to the hospital's forensic assessment and triage unit after presenting at an emergency room with suicidal ideation and cannabis-induced psychosis.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties, finding that the restriction of liberty was necessary, appropriate, and the least onerous and least restrictive intervention available, given the accused's fragile mental state and residual psychotic symptoms.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for armed robbery and theft.

The accused sought an absolute discharge, while the hospital and Crown sought a continuation of the detention order.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his diagnosis of schizophrenia, cannabis use disorder, and history of noncompliance with medication.

The Board ordered a continuation of the detention order, finding it necessary to ensure the hospital can approve accommodations and provide supervised medication administration when the accused transitions to the community.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for arson and weapons offences.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, substance use disorders, and borderline personality disorder, sought a transfer from CAMH to the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre to be closer to family.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing psychotic symptoms, severe behavioural dysregulation, and recent incidents of violence and elopement.

The Board concluded that a transfer was premature, as the accused requires the intensive support, seclusion facilities, and specialized therapy available at CAMH, and must first successfully complete a trial on a mixed-gender unit.

The current detention order was continued.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for arson.

The accused has a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder and a history of medication non-compliance, resulting in violent and aggressive behaviour.

While the accused made recent progress, including advancing on the pass ladder and engaging in therapeutic programming, she continues to experience persistent delusions and fluctuations in her mental status.

Applying the Winko test, the Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered her continued detention at the General Forensic Service at CAMH, with privileges up to residing in approved community housing, as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault and forcible entry.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and a coercive sexual preference, sought a discharge with conditions to reside in his own apartment.

The hospital and the Attorney General sought a continuation of the detention order.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his risk of decompensation, substance use, and sexually inappropriate behaviours if unsupervised.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention order at the hospital.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for communicating safeguarded information about a nuclear power plant to a foreign entity or terrorist group during a manic episode.

At his initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the hospital and the accused sought an absolute discharge, while the Attorney General sought a conditional discharge.

The majority of the Board found that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public, noting his current stability, medication compliance, abstinence from substances, and strong family support.

The accused was granted an absolute discharge.

A dissenting member would have ordered a conditional discharge due to concerns about insight and historical medication non-compliance.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review the hospital's decision to readmit the accused, who had previously been found not criminally responsible, from his community residence.

The accused had engaged in an altercation with a co-resident, prompting the hospital to briefly readmit him to stabilize his mental status and behaviour.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties, finding that the initial restriction of liberty and its continuation for three weeks was the least restrictive and least onerous intervention available to ensure public safety and stabilize the accused.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty imposed on an accused who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm.

The hospital had transferred the accused from a general forensic unit to a secure forensic unit after he exhibited escalating risk behaviours, paranoia, and affective instability.

The Board found that the initial transfer and the ongoing restriction of liberty were the least onerous and least restrictive interventions necessary to manage the accused's risk of violence and untoward behaviour.