Court of Appeal for Ontario

Date: 2025-09-11

Docket: COA-25-CR-0199

Judges: Tulloch C.J.O., Huscroft and Paciocco JJ.A.

In the Matter of: Timothy Brown

An Appeal Under Part XX.1 of the Code

Counsel:

• Anita Szigeti, for the appellant
• Eunwoo Lee, for the respondent, Attorney General of Ontario

Heard: September 3, 2025

On appeal against the disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated January 29, 2025, with reasons dated February 18, 2025.

Reasons for Decision

[1] The only issue on this appeal is whether the Board erred in declining to add a community living clause to a detention order. The majority of the Board refused to do so, finding that it would likely cause conflict with Mr. Brown's treatment team and heighten his frustration (a driver of emotional dysregulation). The minority would have ordered it. The appellant submits that the majority erred by focusing exclusively on public safety, dismissing the attending psychiatrist's opinion that the clause would be therapeutically beneficial on balance, and misapplying this court's judgment in Sookram (Re), 2024 ONCA 823.

[2] We would dismiss the appeal. The majority considered the appellant's mental condition, reintegration, and other needs and sought to advance them by expanding indirectly supervised community access. Its finding that, in the specific circumstances of this case, adding a community living clause would be therapeutically harmful on balance was open to it on the evidence notwithstanding the psychiatrist's contrary opinion, which was qualified and acknowledged the risk of therapeutic harm. It was also open to the majority to determine that, at this point in time, the therapeutic harm outweighed the waitlist reduction benefit. Because these findings are dispositive, it is unnecessary to consider the appellant's argument that the Board misapplied Sookram elsewhere in its analysis.

[3] The appeal is dismissed.

"M. Tulloch C.J.O."

"Grant Huscroft J.A."

"David M. Paciocco J.A."