Re Van Truong Tran, 2026 CanLII 21172

Re: Van Truong Tran

ORB File No: 6922

Hearing held on: Wednesday, February 25, 2026

Place of hearing: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health

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

Before: Alternate Chairperson: Mr. J. Goldenberg Members: Dr. R. Wood Hill Dr. M. Kalia Ms. N. Nathanson Ms. K. McMillan

Parties Appearing: Accused: Van Truong Tran Counsel: Mr. A. Rai

The person in charge of hospital Counsel: Ms. M. Warner

Attorney General of Ontario: Counsel: Mr. M. Feindel

REASONS FOR DISPOSITION

(Dated March 13, 2026)

Introduction

1. On July 9, 2014, Van Truong Tran was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder on charges of attempt murder, assault with a weapon, aggravated assault, uttering death threats or threat to cause bodily harm, and possession of a weapon for dangerous purposes.

2. Mr. Tran is currently subject to a Disposition of the Ontario Review Board dated February 14, 2025, by which he was ordered to be discharged subject to a number of conditions. One of the conditions directed that Mr. Tran “reside at 96 Dowling Avenue, Toronto”.

3. On Wednesday, February 25, 2026, the Ontario Review Board convened a hearing at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, (“CAMH”) and conducted the annual review of Mr. Tran’s Disposition.

Position of the Parties

4. At the outset of the hearing, the parties were canvassed as to their recommendations to the Board.

5. Ms. Warner appeared for CAMH. She advised of the hospital position that Mr. Tran represents a significant threat to public safety, and if the Board so finds, the hospital submits that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of a Conditional Discharge with the exact terms set out in last year’s Disposition.

6. Mr. Feindel appeared for the Attorney General. Mr. Feindel agreed with the hospital’s position save and except for one paragraph contained in last year’s Conditional Discharge. It is Mr. Feindel’s position that paragraph 1(i) is inconsistent and should not be continued in this year’s Disposition. Condition 1(i) requires Mr. Tran to “notify, in writing, the person in charge of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto or his/her designate and the Ontario Review Board 24 hours in advance of any change of existing address or telephone number”. It is Mr. Feindel’s position that condition 1(i) is in conflict with condition 1(a), namely that he reside at 96 Dowling Avenue, Toronto, ON.

7. Mr. Rai appeared for Mr. Tran. Mr. Rai advised that he and his client also support the Board continuing with a Conditional Discharge with either no changes or perhaps consideration to the one issue raised by Mr. Feindel.

Index Offences

8. The circumstances giving rise to the index offences are summarized in last year’s ORB Reasons for Disposition, as follows:

"Mr. Tran had been suffering paranoid delusions. The complainant was an acquaintance whom Mr. Tran had asked to repair a laptop computer. Mr. Tran telephoned the complainant and made accusations against him, including that he was somehow involved in Mr. Tran’s wife having him followed. The men set a time to meet. When that came about, Mr. Tran attacked the victim, stabbing him twice. He later threatened the man. Mr. Tran was arrested the next day. The victim was in hospital for a short time.”

Evidence at Hearing

9. The Board admitted into evidence the Hospital Report dated January 19, 2026. The Hospital Report provides a great deal of information concerning Mr. Tran, his personal history, his mental health history, details of the index offence and Mr. Tran’s course in hospital and in the community subsequent to the date of the original NCR finding. As the Hospital Report was made an exhibit in this hearing it is not necessary to reproduce the information contained in the Hospital Report in these Reasons. We do note, however, the stated diagnoses of:

• Schizophrenia
• Major Depressive Disorder
• Substance Use Disorder, in remission in a controlled setting (i.e., alcohol, stimulant, hallucinogen)
• Differential Diagnosis: Schizoaffective Disorder

10. In addition to the documentary evidence the Board heard from Dr. Kung.

11. I note for the record, that a Vietnamese interpreter was present at the hearing. The Alternate Chair and counsel had a discussion at the outset of the hearing as to the necessity for an interpreter. Ultimately, we reached an arrangement whereby the interpreter would provide translation of most of the evidence and also was available in case Mr. Tran indicated he did not understand some particular matter. All parties were in agreement in proceeding in that fashion.

12. Dr. Kung has been Mr. Tran’s most responsible physician since September of last year. In fact, she had been his most responsible physician previously and returned to that position after her time away from CAMH. Dr. Kung last met with Mr. Tran yesterday. Dr. Kung noted that Mr. Tran has enjoyed “a very positive year.”

13. In response to questions from Ms. Warner, Dr. Kung advised that she and the clinical team accept that at the present time Mr. Tran remains a significant threat to public safety. As well, she and the clinical team are satisfied that the necessary and appropriate Disposition is a continuation of a Conditional Discharge.

14. In response to questions from Mr. Feindel, Dr. Kung confirmed that Mr. Tran lives at 96 Dowling which is in Parkdale, relatively close to CAMH. He does very well there. There is support 24 hours per day. In addition, the staff at the residence observe Mr. Tran’s taking of medication.

15. Dr. Kung stated her opinion that it is “very important” for Mr. Tran to continue to reside at this particular residence.

16. The Board is aware that in past years Mr. Tran would attend at Hong Fook. Mr. Tran, however, has become reluctant to participate in activities at Hong Fook. At one point he advised the doctor that “the voices told him not to go there.” Dr. Kung notes that her patient is “quite a private individual. Dr. Kung also noted that Mr. Tran is more comfortable working with the people at CAMH and participating in programs at CAMH.

17. In response to further questions, Dr. Kung noted that Mr. Tran has been living at this residence since 2022. There have been no readmissions to hospital. He has been compliant with all his medication requirements. Currently Mr. Tran states that “the voices have gone away. Dr. Kung noted that medication compliance appears to be externally motivated. His insight remains very limited.

18. In response to questions from a panel member, Dr. Kung stated her understanding that Mr. Tran is “a permanent resident” in Canada. Dr. Kung believes that Mr. Tran is seeking help so as to become a Canadian citizen.

19. A panel member asked the doctor about the possibility of a non-forensic team to become involved with looking after Mr. Tran. Dr. Kung accepted that that is a possibility but that any such transfer to a non-forensic team would have to be very careful. Dr. Kung noted that Mr. Tran has only been on a Conditional Discharge for one year. The Board understands that Mr. Tran’s Substitute Decision Maker is the Public Guardian and Trustee.

20. Dr. Kung, in response to a question from another member, stated that the clinical team is unanimous in their conclusion that Mr. Tran remains a significant threat to public safety. When asked about how Mr. Tran spends his day, Dr. Kung noted that he has made friends with co-residents, and they frequently go for walks together and participate in some programs. Dr. Kung noted that Mr. Tran attends at different programs at CAMH three times per week.

21. No other evidence was heard at this hearing.

Final Submissions

22. Ms. Warner noted that the parties were making a joint recommendation, save and except for the issue raised by Mr. Feindel. Ms. Warner asked the panel to accept Dr. Kung’s evidence and the evidence in the Hospital Report.

23. A member of the panel asked Ms. Warner to explain how a party who has been found incapable of making treatment decisions could in fact consent pursuant to the provisions of s. 672.55(1). Ms. Warner noted that the Decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Ohenhen (Re), 2018, ONCA 65 dealt with this issue.

24. Mr. Feindel agreed that Mr. Tran remains a significant threat to public safety and agreed that his threat to public safety can be managed with a Conditional Discharge. Mr. Feindel noted that including 1(i), which requires the patient to notify the person in charge of any change of existing address, is totally inconsistent with 1(a), the clause requiring Mr. Tran to continue to reside at 96 Dowling Avenue. Ultimately, both Ms. Warner and Mr. Rai agreed to the removal of 1(i).

25. Mr. Rai in his submissions stressed that his client has enjoyed a very good year. He also accepts that at the present time Mr. Tran represents a significant threat to public safety.

Findings of the Board

26. The Board accepts the evidence of Dr. Kung and the evidence contained in the Hospital Report. In particular, we accept the evidence that Mr. Tran remains a significant threat to public safety. We note the very serious nature of the index offence. We note that although Mr. Tran is medication compliant, it is clear that his compliance is externally driven.

27. The panel notes the Decision of the Court of Appeal in Ohenhen and in particular, paragraph 78:

“To me, the nature of the s. 672.55(1) condition suggests that an accused would not require the same level of capacity to consent to the condition as they would to consent to the treatment plan referred to by the condition.”

The panel is satisfied that Mr. Tran does have the capacity to consent to the condition.

28. We accept that Mr. Tran’s threat to public safety can be managed with the Board issuing a Conditional Discharge. The Board agrees to remove clause 1(i).

29. In reaching our Disposition, the Board has taken into consideration public safety, Mr. Tran’s mental condition and his other needs, and Mr. Tran’s reintegration into society.

DATED this 13^th^ day of March, 2026, at the City of Toronto, in the Toronto Region.

Mr. J. Goldenberg Alternate Chairperson

__________________

Office of the Registrar Ontario Review Board