The appellant sought leave to appeal and appealed a summary conviction appeal decision upholding a finding that he was not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for breach of probation.
The Court of Appeal held that, although the record supported the order directing an NCR assessment under ss. 672.11(b) and 672.12(3)(b) of the Criminal Code, leave should not be granted on that issue.
Leave was granted on the issue of the sufficiency of the trial judge's reasons for the NCR finding.
Applying the framework for adequacy of reasons in criminal cases, the court concluded the reasons did not disclose whether the trial judge found incapacity under the relevant branch of s. 16 or how the mental disorder rendered the appellant incapable of knowing the breach was wrong.
The NCR finding was set aside and a new trial ordered.
