Re: Okevie Williams
ORB File No: 6780/6883
Hearing held on: Tuesday, February 10, 2026
Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health Via Zoom Videoconference
Pursuant to: Section 672.81(2.1) of the Criminal Code
Before:
Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg
Members: Dr. T. Verny Dr. G. Nexhipi Ms. A. Israel Ms. C. Plyley
Parties Appearing:
Accused: Okevie Williams Counsel: Ms. S. Dubb
The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. S. Rosales Zelaya
Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. M. Feindel
REASONS FOR DECISION
(Dated February 25, 2026)
On June 10, 2015, Okevie Williams was found not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder on charges of assault, and assault with a weapon. On November 25, 2015, Mr. Williams was found not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder on charges of assault with a weapon, and assault causing bodily harm.
Mr. Williams is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated May 5, 2025, by which he was ordered to be detained at the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto (“CAMH”).
By letter dated December 29, 2025, CAMH advised the Ontario Review Board that Mr. Williams, who had been living in the community in approved accommodation, but on December 18, 2025, Mr. Williams was returned to hospital, and at the time of this hearing, Mr. Williams remained in hospital.
As a result of the hospital letter, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing on Tuesday, February 10, 2026, and conducted a Restriction of Liberty hearing.
Position of the Parties
At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.
Ms. Rosales Zelaya appeared for CAMH. She advised of the hospital position that the decision to bring Mr. Williams into hospital was warranted and Mr. Williams’ ongoing stay in hospital represented the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital. The Board was told that at the time of this hearing Mr. Williams remains detained in CAMH.
Mr. Feindel appeared for the Attorney General. Mr. Feindel supported the hospital’s position.
Near the start of the hearing Ms. Dubb asked for an opportunity to speak privately with her client. That private meeting was arranged. Ms. Dubb, upon returning to the meeting, advised that she and her client agree with the hospital’s position.
Evidence at Hearing
The Board admitted into evidence a Hospital Report dated January 22, 2026. That Report provides considerable information concerning Mr. Williams, and considerable information about the circumstances surrounding the return to hospital.
In addition to the documentary evidence, the Board heard from Dr. O'Sullivan. Dr. O'Sullivan acknowledged the deterioration of Mr. Williams’ stability. Mr. Williams had been living at a facility known as the Oakwood Arch, which is a supervised facility.
According to the Hospital Report and the evidence of Dr. O'Sullivan, in mid-December 2025, the residence advised the hospital of a period of behavioural disturbance (agitation, argumentativeness, disorganization, mood disturbance, irritability, thought disorder and increasing paranoid ideation). It also appears from the Hospital Report that on December 18, Mr. Williams was observed yelling at fellow tenants and, also yelling at members of the public who were walking adjacent to this residence. The Board understands that a representative of the hospital asked Mr. Williams to return to hospital. Mr. Williams declined to do so. One of the doctors at the hospital issued a Form 49 and the Toronto Police Services did pick up Mr. Williams and took him to the Emergency Department at CAMH. Once again, at CAMH, Mr. Williams was irritable, agitated and significantly thought disordered. Mr. Williams denied having a mental illness. It was clear and admitted that Mr. Williams used alcohol and cannabis. We note that on occasions he denied such use but ultimately advised Dr. O'Sullivan that he had been using both alcohol and cannabis. Mr. Williams’ rapid decompensation was significant and left the hospital with no choice other than detaining Mr. Williams in hospital.
We note that Mr. Williams was first placed in a unit known as CCC3. Subsequently, he was transferred to a unit known as PRT8 and finally, the Board understands that on February 7, Mr. Williams was transferred to Unit 1-4, which is a General Forensic Unit at CAMH.
Dr. O'Sullivan believed that the early two placements took place simply because of a lack of beds on the General Forensic Unit.
In response to questions from Ms. Dubb, Dr. O'Sullivan acknowledged that the test results of Mr. Williams’ urine were negative for the use of substances. Dr. O'Sullivan suggested that notwithstanding the negative urine sample results, he is satisfied that Mr. Williams had been using both alcohol and cannabis and Dr. O'Sullivan expressed the opinion that it is “not unusual” for such results to be inaccurate.
In response to questions from a panel member, Dr. O'Sullivan repeated that the lack of beds on a General Unit was the reason for the two earlier placements of Mr. Williams.
No other evidence was heard at this hearing.
Final Submissions
Ms. Rosales Zelaya noted the parties were all in agreement. She asked the panel to accept Dr. O'Sullivan’s evidence and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report. We were advised during the hearing that Dr. O'Sullivan believed that Mr. Williams would probably stay in hospital for a period from four to eight weeks.
Mr. Feindel agreed that the decision to bring Mr. Williams into hospital was warranted and his ongoing stay in hospital represented the least onerous and least restrictive decision available to the hospital.
Ms. Dubb noted that she and her client agreed with the hospital’s position.
Findings of the Board
The Board accepts the evidence of Dr. O'Sullivan and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report. We accept that Mr. Williams’ deterioration was significant and that the hospital had no other decision to make other than to return Mr. Williams to hospital.
It is unfortunate that there were no beds available on a General Forensic Unit at the time when Mr. Williams was first returned to hospital. We do note that he is now in a General Forensic Unit and expect that he will continue to remain in the General Forensic Unit until he is returned to his community residence. We were told during the evidence that Mr. Williams will be able to return to the residence where he had been living.
DATED this 25th day of February, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.
Mr. J. Goldenberg Alternate Chairperson
Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board