R. v. Robertson, 2009 ONCA 860
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Laskin, Sharpe and Gillese JJ.A.
BETWEEN:
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
James Douglas Robertson and the Mental Health Centre Penetanguishene Oak Ridges Division
Appellant
COUNSEL:
James Robertson, appearing in person
Anita Szigeh, amicus curiae
Janice Blackburn, for the Mental Health Centre Penetanguishene Oak Ridges Division
Riun Shandler, for the respondent
Joe Wright, for the Ontario Review Board
Heard: December 3, 2009
On appeal from the disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated June 5, 2009.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
1After a somewhat probing examination of the Board’s reasons, we are satisfied that the Board’s disposition was reasonable and fully supported by the evidence. The fresh evidence is confirmatory of its finding that the appellant remains a significant threat to public safety.
2The Board fully considered the appellant’s liberty interests in determining the least onerous and least restrictive disposition. It clearly concluded that detention in a maximum secure facility is necessary as public safety would be compromised by a detention order at any level below that.
3As for the issue of whether there was an impasse over treatment, we see no basis to intervene in that regard. The appellant was continuing treatment at the time of the Board hearing and there were other treatment alternatives the appellant could pursue at Oak Ridge.
4While there seems to have been some friction between the Board and amicus curiae at the hearing, we are satisfied that it occasioned no prejudice to the appellant.
5For the reasons given by the respondents in their factums, including those relating to the Board’s finding that any disposition other than detention at a maximum secure institution would compromise public safety, we reject the appellant’s request for an absolute discharge.
6Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
