3 total
Detention order continued for NCR accused who remains a significant threat to public safety.
The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for several driving and assault offences.
The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, experienced a recent decline in mental stability and faces significant challenges due to his lack of immigration status in Canada.
The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties, finding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.
The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention order and supported the parties' plan to pursue an international transfer of the accused to India.
Offender sentenced for sexual interference and luring subjected to 20-year SOIRA and 2-year internet restriction orders.
Following a guilty plea to sexual interference, luring, and extortion, the offender was sentenced to 23 months' imprisonment.
The Crown sought a 20-year SOIRA order and an internet restriction order under s. 161 of the Criminal Code.
The court found that the offender failed to rebut the presumption for a SOIRA order, as the offences were predatory and the impact of registration was not grossly disproportionate to the public interest.
The court imposed a 20-year SOIRA order and a 2-year internet restriction order tailored to minimize risk without unduly interfering with the offender's rehabilitation and employment.
Appeal of pharmacist discipline penalty dismissed; tribunal's decision not to impose ownership restrictions owed deference.
The Ontario College of Pharmacists appealed a penalty decision of its Discipline Committee regarding a pharmacist who admitted to professional misconduct for submitting false billings to the Ontario Drug Benefit Plan.
The College argued the Panel erred by not imposing standard ownership restrictions on the pharmacist.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding that the Panel's decision was owed great deference, did not misapprehend the evidence, and reasonably balanced the principles of protection of the public, proportionality, and rehabilitation without imposing the requested restrictions.