Re: Ryan Cunneen, 2026 CanLII 21157

Re: Ryan Cunneen

ORB File No: 8694

Hearing held on: Tuesday, February 3, 2026

Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

Pursuant to: Section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. M. Segal Members: Hon. N. Kozloff Dr. G. Chaimowitz Dr. H. Moulden Mr. S. Duffy

Parties Appearing: Accused: Ryan Cunneen Counsel: Ms. M. Addie

The person in charge of hospital: Counsel: Ms. J. Szabo

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. C. Coughlan

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated March 10, 2026)

Introduction

1. On December 17, 2024, Ryan Cunneen was found not criminally responsible (“NCR”) on account of mental disorder on charges of manslaughter, and mischief, all contrary to the Criminal Code.

2. Mr. Cunneen is currently subject to a disposition of the Ontario Review Board (“the ORB” and “the Board”) dated February 24, 2025, ordering his detention at the General Forensic Unit of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (“CAMH” and “the hospital”) with privileges up to and including entering the community, indirectly supervised.

3. On Tuesday, February 3, 2026, the Board convened a hearing to review Mr. Cunneen’s disposition pursuant to section 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code. Mr. Cunneen was present at the hearing and represented by Counsel, Ms. M. Addie.

4. The issues to be determined at the hearing were whether Mr. Cunneen continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code and, if so, what was the necessary and appropriate disposition which was also the least onerous and least restrictive, taking into account the factors set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code.

Positions of the Parties

5. At the commencement of the hearing the parties were requested to provide their initial without prejudice positions with respect to the issues before the Board.

6. Counsel on behalf of the Hospital advised that the position of the Hospital was that Mr. Cunneen continued to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition was a Detention Order with privileges up to and including community living.

7. Counsel for the Attorney General supported the Hospital position subject to evidence regarding the risk assessment.

8. Counsel for Mr. Cunneen supported the Hospital position and expressly conceded that Mr. Cunneen remains a significant threat to the safety of the public.

Findings

9. For the reasons that follow, the panel unanimously agrees with the finding that Mr. Cunneen continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a Detention Order with the conditions proposed by the hospital.

The Evidence

10. The evidence at the hearing consisted of the Hospital Report dated January 5, 2026, (made Exhibit 1) and the oral evidence of Dr. S. Woodside, Mr. Cunneen’s treating psychiatrist and one of the authors of the Hospital Report.

The Index Offences

11. The following information regarding the index offence is a composite summary of the police synopsis that is set out in full in the Hospital Report and the summary of the index offences at para. 7 of last year’s Reasons for Disposition dated March 20, 2025:

"On Friday January 20, 2023, at approximately 11:37 AM, Toronto Police Communications received a radio call for an assault. The 911 caller advised that a female had been pushed by a male. The caller further advised that the female was unconscious and breathing.

Toronto Police officers arrived on scene and located an elderly (92-year-old) female bleeding from the face. Paramedics arrived and tended to the female. At 12:02 PM the female was pronounced deceased at the scene. She was later identified as Xiaoxia WANG.

Several passersby who rendered aid to the female ahead of the arrival of first responders, remained on scene. None of them had witnessed the incident. 51 Division Criminal Investigative Bureau attended the scene and commenced the investigation. Homicide and Missing Person Unit Team 4 was notified and immediately began providing investigative guidance and support.

The following sequence of events has been established: On Friday, January 20th, 2023, at approximately 11:35 AM the accused Ryan CUNNEEN was at a Subway Restaurant located at 34 Church St, Toronto. While there, the accused threw a brick at the business's window causing it to break. This resulted in approximately $3000 to $5000 worth of damage. The accused fled the premises on foot.

Shortly thereafter, at approximately 11:39 AM the victim was walking northbound on Yonge Street in front of 83 Yonge St, Toronto. The accused ran up to the victim at full speed and pushed her with both hands from behind, causing her to fall face forward and her to hit her head on the sidewalk. The accused ran from the scene and continued northbound on Yonge Street. At 2:07 PM the accused was located and arrested for aggravated assault and mischief. He was transported to 51 Division and held for a show cause hearing. A 72-hour hold was requested and granted to allow for further investigation to take place.

On Monday January 23, 2023, a postmortem examination was conducted by Dr. Pollanen. The preliminary cause of death was determined to be "blunt impact facial trauma and hyper extension neck trauma". As a result, the accused was charged with manslaughter."

Background Information

12. The Hospital Report contains a great deal of information about Mr. Cunneen’s background including Personal and Development History (A. Childhood and Family History, B. Education and Employment History, C. Relationship History, D. Adult Lifestyle); Medical History; Substance Use History; Psychiatric History, Family History; and Legal History. The following details – reprinted from last year’s Reasons for Disposition – will suffice for the purposes of these reasons:

"Mr. Cunneen is a 39-year-old man who was born in Sault Ste. Marie. His parents divorced when he was five. He lived with his mother until the age of 12 and because of ongoing conflict with her, he moved in with his father.

Mr. Cunneen was an Ontario Scholar and attended Brock University where he achieved a degree in General Studies. His mother died and left him money in trust, which was administered by a family friend who provided him with a monthly stipend. However, as Mr. Cunneen began experiencing mental health issues, he stopped cashing his cheques.

According to Mr. Cunneen’s father, when Mr. Cunneen turned 16, he began to show signs of mental illness. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia and provided medication. His father noted a pattern where Mr. Cunneen would begin to do well, eventually stop taking his medication and then experience a deterioration in his mental status. This cycle would repeat itself.

The Hospital Report describes a number of admissions to hospital between 2007 and 2009 when Mr. Cunneen endorsed depression, severe mood swings, paranoia and thoughts of suicide. In 2009, Mr. Cunneen was brought to emergency by his parents. He had become angrier and more alarming to his parents. He expressed more delusional thought content. Mr. Cunneen was admitted under the Mental Health Act. He was found incapable for treatment decisions, and his mother became his substitute decision maker. He successfully appealed his involuntary status and left against medical advice. At discharge, Mr. Cunneen refused a prescription for antipsychotic medication.

A month later, his mother again brought him to hospital. He was admitted under the auspices of a Form 1 as an inpatient and started on an antipsychotic medication. He was compliant and cooperative during his stay, however, when he no longer met the threshold for hospitalization, he discharged himself against medical advice.

Between 2010 and 2017, Mr. Cunneen was under the care of CAMH. He was compliant with treatment and his psychotic symptoms remained in remission. He also abstained from substances. He was employed, lived in shared accommodation and socialized with friends.

Unfortunately, Mr. Cunneen had a number of admissions to hospital in 2017 and 2018. There were concerns that Mr. Cunneen had not been adherent with treatment and had been aggressive with a roommate in the context of psychosis. Mr. Cunneen was deemed capable regarding treatment decisions, although his insight into his illness and need for treatment remained poor. He reported that he did not need psychiatric medication and declined long-acting medication, which had been offered and encouraged.

In 2018, Mr. Cunneen’s mother died which became a significant stressor for him. In July, he brandished a knife at his landlord. While an inpatient at CAMH, he brandished a plastic knife at nursing staff and barricaded himself in an interview room. He was deemed incapable of consenting to treatment, and his father became his substitute decision maker. Upon discharge from hospital, Mr. Cunneen became subject to a Community Treatment Order. Unfortunately, he discontinued medication and broke all contact with his family.

In September 2020, Mr. Cunneen was charged with sexual assault while in British Columbia. He was admitted to hospital pursuant to a court-ordered fitness assessment. He was found unfit to stand trial and remained so at the conclusion of a Treatment Order and came under the jurisdiction of the BC Review Board. After eventually being found fit to stand trial, Mr. Cunneen became an involuntary patient. He was treated with long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication, which resulted in some improvement. However, given he remained symptomatic, he was deemed treatment resistant. Clozapine was initiated along with long-acting injections of antipsychotic medication. His charges were stayed in September of 2021.

Mr. Cunneen stated that prior to his arrest for the index offences, he was homeless and sleeping on the streets. He had not taken any form of antipsychotic medication for the previous two months.

The Hospital Report includes a chart listing a number of interactions that Mr. Cunneen had with police that resulted in charges. It is unclear whether these charges were resolved by way of mental health diversion or some other means.

Shortly after his arrest for the index offences, Mr. Cunneen was found unfit to stand trial and admitted to CAMH pursuant to a Treatment Order. He was found fit to stand trial on June 13, 2023, and returned to CAMH pursuant to a Keep Fit Order. He was admitted to the Secure Forensic Unit where he has remained."

Course Since NCR Finding

13. The following summary of Mr. Culleen’s course from the NCR finding to February of 2025 appeared in last year’s Reasons for Disposition and is included to give context to his course from that time to the present:

"Mr. Cunneen’s current diagnosis is Schizophrenia. He has been assessed as being capable of making treatment decisions. He continues to display fixed grandiose delusions of a chronic nature. However, they do not significantly interfere with his day-to-day interactions.

Dr. Liu testified before the Board. He has been Mr. Cunneen’s treating psychiatrist since September 2023. Since then, Mr. Cunneen has been compliant with medication and has been rule abiding. There have been no behavioral concerns."

In response to questions from Mr. Coughlan, Dr. Liu indicated that Mr. Cunneen would be, "Starting at the bottom of the pass ladder and it would take some time for him to progress applying for indirectly supervised passes. Dr. Liu indicated that the time frame could be in the range of six months."

14. The following is reprinted from the section of the Hospital Report dealing with the course of treatment from January 2025 to December 2025:

"During this period, there were no behavioural or management issues observed. He was compliant with medication although he continued to demonstrate poor insight into the need for the same.

Mr. Cunneen agreed to participate in a 1:1 Forensic Systems program as of February 2025 and had his first session as of March 2025. He was approved for use of Level 1 privileges after receiving his ORB disposition on February 24, 2025. His disposition was detention at a general forensic unit without any community living privileges. He was placed on a waitlist for transfer to a general unit at that time.

Despite approval for Level 1 privileges, Mr. Cunneen was reluctant to use the privileges, citing unavailability of security staff and a lack of motivation. Even when allowed to go out on passes with unit staff, he remained largely uninterested in the same. He remained largely isolative in his room. He exercised a single pass while on FSUA.

He was referred to FORCAT for a full risk assessment, but this was not completed due to FORCAT not having capacity for any new cases.

He was transferred from FSUA to FGUC on April 22, 2025.

FGUC: April 2025 to December 2025

As noted above, Mr. Cunneen was transferred to FGUC under the care of Dr. S. Woodside on April 22, 2025.

Throughout his stay on FGUC, Mr. Cunneen has not evidenced any behavioural or management problems. He has not tested positive for any non-prescribed drugs or alcohol on random urine analyses. He was compliant with ongoing treatment with the long-acting antipsychotic medication Paliperidone 150mg IM every four weeks.

At the same time, Mr. Cunneen initially followed the same pattern he had shown on FSUA: he remained isolated to his room, declined to exercise any privileges and was reluctant to participate in any programming, although he did agree to complete the Forensic Systems program. He continued to endorse grandiose delusions (e.g. having a great deal of money, owning several properties and having worked for various law enforcement agencies) but denied any other delusions or perceptual disturbance. He was unwilling to allow staff to try to confirm any parts of his self-report in this regard and declined to allow any contact with family members. His level of insight into his illness and the need for treatment remained poor although he remained committed to taking treatment so long as he was under the ORB. He was not able to connect any of his hospitalizations or police involvement with symptoms of his illness or stopping medication.

At the same time, he made repeated comments that he would discontinue all treatment with medication were he not under the ORB as he did not believe he suffered from any psychiatric illness.

His prior treatment with different medications over the years was reviewed with him but Mr. Cunneen indicated he preferred to continue treatment with paliperidone, despite experiencing some difficulty with sexual functioning.

He completed the Forensic Systems Group in May 2025 and agreed to participate in the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program thereafter. However, he remained reluctant to use any off-ward privileges, slowing his progress on the Privilege Ladder. He later (August 2025) declined to complete IMR, stating, “I don’t have a mental illness, so what is the point?” He also declined an offer to meet 1:1 with a counsellor from FORCAT indicating he did not need this.

On September 9, 2025, he was approached by Dr. Wain from FORCAT regarding completing a risk assessment but declined to do so, stating he was not interested in judgment or scrutiny. He subsequently agreed to the assessment after discussing it with Dr. Woodside, who noted the absence of a risk assessment prior to his initial ORB hearing had led to the hospital to hold off recommending community living as part of any disposition. However, after meeting with Dr. Wain again on September 9, 2025, he once again declined to participate in the assessment.

He subsequently refused to attend the next two team reviews although he did agree to meet privately with Dr. Woodside. After Dr. Woodside indicated his intention on October 8, 2025, to call for a case conference regarding Mr. Cunneen’s lack of progress on FGUC, Mr. Cunneen agreed to begin using his privileges on a regular basis.

Subsequent to this, he did begin using passes and began attending a documentary group and a current events group. He was subsequently approved for Level 2 privileges on November 17, 2025 and for Level 3 privileges as of December 31, 2025.

During interviews with Dr. Woodside, Mr. Cunneen reported having twin 20-year-old daughters who were living with their mother in New York. He indicated the mother had just wanted to have children with him and he obliged. He reported only having met the girls once when they were 14. He stated he had never been asked to provide any financial assistance although he stated he had given a substantial amount of money to their mother on one occasion. He indicated he might possibly reach out to his daughters at some point in future.

He also reported having a 6-year-old son with another woman from New York, whom he indicated “wanted my seed.” He reported no contact with this woman or his son thereafter. Mr. Cunneen was unwilling to provide any contact information or allow any contact with either mother, and stated his own family was not aware of these children.

During a further meeting with Mr. Cunneen on November 28, 2025, Dr. Woodside highlighted his concern that Mr. Cunneen’s refusal to complete the risk assessment might cause the ORB concern regarding adding community living privileges. Mr. Cunneen subsequently agreed to complete the risk assessment. The FORCAT psychologist, Dr. Wain met with him on multiple occasions thereafter; the risk assessment report remained pending at the time of this report."

15. The following information is excerpted from the sections of the Hospital Report dealing with risk:

"Risk Assessment

Historical (H) risk items that are Present include a major mental disorder (high Relevance) and treatment or supervision response disorder (high Relevance). Items identified as possibly/partial present included a history of violence (high relevance) and substance use relationships, and other antisocial behaviours (both of medium relevance). Issues relating to employment were omitted due to a lack of fulsome information.

Clinical (C) risk items that are Present and of High Relevance include ongoing problems with insight, symptoms of major mental illness and Treatment or Supervision response. Items identified as possibly/partially present included instability (medium relevance). Mr. Cunneen continues to display fixed grandiose delusions of a chronic nature as well as negative symptoms of his illness including apathy and amotivation, which has limited his progress to date. The symptoms do not directly contribute to his risk of immediate violence or aggression. He continues to demonstrate a lack of insight but has been able to comply with ORB conditions and medications. He indicated he planned to follow the conditions as set up by the ORB while under the ORB but also indicated he planned to discontinue all medication as soon as he was no longer under the auspices of the ORB.

Risk (R) Management items that would be Present and of medium Relevance include personal support. Items identified as possibly/partially present include Treatment or Supervision response (medium relevance) and stress or coping (medium relevance). Mr. Cunneen is currently well supported by a professional team in a safe/stable inpatient setting.

If Mr. Cunneen were detained on the forensic service, his risk of future violence would be medium. His risk of imminent violence is Low. Without the oversight of the ORB and external controls, his risk of future violence would be medium-high.

Mr. Cunneen is socially isolated, basically living in his own world. He doesn’t make attempts to connect with his friends, if there’s any. He stays away from others and only makes sporadic interactions. His connection and relationship are insufficient to provide resources and backup. His current protection comes mainly from the fact that he is currently an inpatient and is well contained.

Re-offence Scenario

In risk assessment, one of the best predictors of future violence is a patient’s history of violence. Notably, Mr. Cunneen had mainly non-violent charges around 2010 but charges after 2020 were more of a violent nature (including a charge of sexual assault), including the index offense. Each episode of violence/aggression appears to have come while Mr. Cunneen was actively psychotic and not receiving treatment with medication.

If Mr. Cunneen were to reoffend, it would likely be in the context of psychotic symptoms due to non-compliance to medication, or stressors leading to psychotic decompensation. There are also other factors that might contribute to future re-offences, e.g., history of alcohol/cannabis use, unstable relationships and breakdowns of family/social connections.

Overall, in the absence of external monitoring, Mr. Cunneen will likely disengage with services due to his poor insight and become non-compliant with medication, as has been the case in the past, which will increase his risk of relapsing into a psychotic episode, similar to his mental state at the time of the index offence, which may well predispose him to violence and sexual assault

Diagnosis

Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia disorder is a major mental disorder that is characterized by both symptoms of psychosis. Schizophrenia disorder typically follows a lifelong course and is associated with high rates of relapse if not properly treated. With ongoing treatment, psychotic symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions can usually be attenuated, sometimes completely remitted, but the possibility of residual symptoms is likely.

Although Mr. Cunneen presented with mood symptoms and suicidal ideation during the early course of his illness, his more recent presentations have been primarily characterized by the presence of chronic fixed delusions. Although he is able to achieve stabilization and maintain clinical stability while under antipsychotic treatment, this has not been accompanied by any improvement into his insight regarding his illness or the need for ongoing treatment with medication. It is clear that when he becomes non-compliant, his psychotic symptoms flare up. In addition to the delusions, there is significant emotional/behavioural dysregulation, thought disorder and loss of reality testing. At the time of this report, Mr. Cunneen continues to present with fixed grandiose delusions and lack of insight.

At the same time, he retains a certain level of reality testing sufficient to appreciate his current legal situation and the responsibility to comply with conditions placed on him by the ORB. He has pledged to continue with antipsychotic treatment if required to/as long as he remains under the ORB.

Substance Use disorders, alcohol, and cannabis (currently in remission in protected environment)

Although Mr. Cunneen asserts that he no longer uses alcohol and cannabis, there is a history of regular use of both alcohol and cannabis when he was in the university. Notably, although Mr. Cunneen asserts that he hasn’t been using alcohol/substances for quite some time and denies urges or temptations, he did have a history of attending alcohol detoxification services, which indicates his use of alcohol might not be as insignificant as he asserts. This raises the possibility of potential future use of substances that might contribute to the clinical instability and increase his risk of violence.

Although Mr. Cunneen denies craving and urges for using substances and has not exhibited any substance craving behaviours in the controlled environment, it remains to be tested whether that would continue to be the case when subject to a lesser degree of structure and supervision. Mr. Cunneen will benefit from ongoing abstinence from alcohol and other substances, and it remains recommended this be included in his disposition.

Composite Assessment of Risk

Given Mr. Cunneen’s history of mental illness, previous offense history while unwell, and lack of insight with high likelihood of non-compliance, he continues to meet the threshold for significant threat as defined in Section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code."

16. The Hospital Report concludes with the recommendation of the treatment team:

"Team Review of Recommendation

a. Order

The team unanimously agree that Mr. Cunneen still presents a significant threat to the safety of the public.

The necessary and appropriate measure to manage his risk is a detention order at the General Forensic Unit at CAMH.

The team also unanimously agrees that there should be consideration of adding community living privileges in approved accommodations, although this is to some degree dependent on the results of his risk assessment. While the risk assessment report is not yet available, the team believes it will be completed prior to Mr. Cunneen’s ORB hearing in February 2026.

b. Privileges

Consideration of the addition of community living in approved accommodations

c. Restrictions / Expectations

Weapons prohibition.

Abstain from alcohol and non-medically prescribed substances and submit random urine samples to assess for same."

Evidence at the Hearing

17. Dr. Woodside was the only witness to testify at the hearing.

18. In response to questions from counsel for the hospital about the team recommendation for community living, he responded that Mr. Cunneen had enjoyed 6 years of stability in the community before his more recent struggles.

19. Asked about the effectiveness of his current antipsychotic medication (paliperidone Sustenna) the doctor said that while Mr. Cunneen was behaviourally stable on that medication, he was still grandiose.

20. He added that Mr. Cunneen was unforthcoming about finances and family, albeit he understands that he will have to cooperate regarding finances in the search for accommodation.

21. With respect to the privilege ladder, Dr. Woodside reiterated that Mr. Cunneen continues to be reluctant to using his privileges.

22. He said that Mr. Cunneen is currently undergoing programming (after a great deal of encouragement at the outset) and is quite positive. He added, however that Mr. Culleen does not believe he is mentally ill (one of the reasons he is reluctant to do programming), adding that Mr. Cullen has stated in the past that he would discontinue medication (when no longer under Board jurisdiction).

23. The doctor posited that Mr. Cunneen’s lack of insight (as distinct from his psychosis) is a long-standing issue which informs his tendency to fall away from treatment after stabilization.

24. Asked about the plan for the year to come, Dr. Woodside responded that the team would (continue to) encourage programming as well as the use of passes and stressed the importance of stabilizing Mr. Cunneen so that he does not regress.

25. In response to questions from counsel for the Attorney General Dr. Woodside said that Mr. Cunneen is currently at Level 3 on the pass ladder, and that he would advance once he fully made use of them.

26. Asked what the issues were with Mr. Cunneen other than his reluctance to use passes and attend programming i.e. in addition to his psychosis, Dr. Woodside replied, “Attitudinal.”

27. In response to questions from counsel for Mr. Cunneen the doctor agreed that Mr. Cunneen had expressed how stressful life on the forensic secure unit (“FSU”) was, that he had made a positive transition to the forensic general unit (“FGU”), and that he had wanted a slow, relaxed adjustment to the FGU.

28. Asked about Mr. Cunneen’s engagement with programming and plans, the doctor replied that he had declined to cooperate with the risk assessment and failed to attend meetings before resuming.

29. When counsel suggested that Mr. Cunneen was “taking the summer off and reenergizing in the fall, Dr. Woodside responded, “With much encouragement” (including telling him he would convene a case conference about Mr. Culleen staying on the unit he likes being on).

30. The doctor agreed that Mr. Cunneen was “somewhat more engaged” with his co-patients during the Blue Jays run.

31. When counsel suggested that Mr. Cunneen wants to wait until it is warmer before going out, Dr. Woodside replied that he is not alone but that it “seems to be part of a pattern” and that he needs ongoing encouragement. He observed that Mr. Cunneen is rule oriented and complies when the expectations are clear.

32. In response to questions from the panel, when asked if Mr. Cunneen was capable of consenting to treatment, Dr. Woodside replied, “Marginally.” He then expressed a reluctance to go to the Consent and Capacity Board, adding that “perhaps” optimization of medication would improve things but historically that had not been the case.

33. Regarding Mr. Cunneen’s decision to decline ODSP, the doctor observed that it will “come to a head as we approach the actual sourcing of housing” when the hospital will need “all” Mr. Cunneen’s information.

34. Dr. Woodside noted that Mr. Cunneen has continued to say that he would stop taking antipsychotic medication once he was no longer under ORB jurisdiction.

35. Dr. Woodside said that the team was still in the process of trying to optimize Mr. Cunneen’s medication, adding that it was an ongoing concern given that Mr. Cunneen had rejected this to date and remains capable of making decisions in this regard.

36. Regarding the issue of collateral information, the doctor observed that some information is more critical i.e. financial, and some information is less critical i.e. family and employment.

Final Submissions

37. Counsel on behalf of the hospital, the Attorney General and Mr. Cunneen jointly submitted that the necessary and appropriate disposition is a Detention Order with community living in accommodation approved by the person in charge, beginning with 24/7 supervised accommodation as the first step in a thoughtful, gradual progression.

Analysis and Conclusion

38. We have carefully considered the Hospital Report and the viva voce evidence of Dr. Woodside and unanimously agree that Mr. Cunneen continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public. The uncontroverted, convincing evidence, as summarized in the Hospital Report, is that “[G]iven his history of mental illness, previous offence history while unwell, and lack of insight with high likelihood of non-compliance, he continues to meet the threshold for significant threat as defined in section 672.5401 of the Criminal Code.

39. We have also considered the necessary and appropriate, least restrictive and least onerous disposition, bearing in mind the criteria set out in section 672.54 of the Criminal Code which include the need to protect the public from dangerous persons, the mental condition of the accused, the reintegration of the accused into society and the other needs of the accused.

40. Mr. Culleen has been medication adherent since his admission to CAMH following the NCR finding. Nevertheless, some of his psychotic symptoms persist. He has been marginally compliant with the efforts of the treatment team, albeit with much encouragement from them, to engage with appropriate programming. He has declined to provide the treatment team with information – particularly financial information – which is essential to his advance up the ladder to living in the community. He refused to cooperate with the risk assessment until the eleventh hour. He has been reluctant to use his passes which also delays his progress up the ladder while complicating the ability of the treatment team to assess his ability to cope with each new stage. The evidence is clear that he requires the kind of close supervision that is only available under a Detention Order.

41. In the result, we are in unanimous agreement that a Detention Order with the proposed conditions is the necessary and appropriate, least restrictive, and least onerous disposition and we so order.

DATED this 10^th^ day of March, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Hon. N. Kozloff Legal Member

__________________

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board