Sarah Rosales Zelaya

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for attempted murder in 1991, has a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder and resides in the community under a detention order.

The majority of the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to her treatment-resistant illness, lack of insight, and risk of rapid decompensation if she becomes non-compliant with medication.

The majority concluded that a detention order remains the necessary and appropriate disposition to ensure the hospital retains authority over her housing and can rapidly readmit her if her mental state deteriorates.

A dissenting minority would have granted a conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including uttering threats and assaulting a peace officer.

The accused's treating psychiatrist testified that his understanding of the court process had improved significantly and that he now met the limited cognitive capacity test for fitness.

The Board accepted this evidence, finding that the accused had a reality-based understanding of the criminal court process and could instruct counsel.

The Board concluded the accused was fit to stand trial and ordered him returned to court.

The accused was found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for arson and referred to the Ontario Review Board.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation of the parties and issued a Detention Order with community living privileges, finding that the accused poses a significant threat to public safety that requires the structure of a Detention Order to manage her risk of psychotic decompensation.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault, robbery, and failing to comply with probation.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and a severe substance use disorder, and has a history of non-compliance with treatment.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused lacks insight into her illness and continues to experience psychotic symptoms.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of her detention at the hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an Indigenous accused found not criminally responsible for murder and indignity to a dead body.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his schizophrenia, history of medication non-compliance, and substance use disorder.

The Board ordered a continuation of his detention at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with the addition of indirectly supervised community access and community living in approved accommodation.

Furthermore, applying Gladue principles, the Board ordered the preparation of a Gladue Report for the accused's next annual review to properly consider his unique circumstances as an Indigenous person.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused had previously been found unfit to stand trial on charges of assault with a weapon.

Based on the hospital report and the testimony of the assessing doctor, all parties agreed that the accused was now fit to stand trial.

The Board accepted this evidence, found the accused fit to stand trial, and directed that the charges be returned to court.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the Disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly recommended continuing the Detention Order while amending the residential clause to allow the accused to relocate to Windsor, Ontario for new employment.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation, finding the accused remained a significant threat to public safety, and ordered continued detention at the General Forensic Unit at CAMH with the requested travel and residential privileges.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault causing bodily harm.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had a positive year in hospital with no concerning behaviours.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety due to his history of violence when non-compliant with medication and experiencing psychotic symptoms.

The Board ordered the continuation of the detention order with amended conditions to allow for a supervised transition into supportive housing in the community.

The respondent moved to lift the stay of a Consent and Capacity Board decision pending appeal.

The CCB had confirmed the appellant's involuntary status and his incapacity to consent to treatment with antipsychotic medications.

The appellant, appearing self-represented with an amicus curiae, opposed the motion and sought to expedite the appeal instead.

The court applied the four-part test under section 19 of the Health Care Consent Act, 1996, and found that all criteria were satisfied.

The court granted the motion to lift the stay and authorized treatment with Paliperidone pending final disposition of the appeal, while also ordering the appeal to be expedited and heard on October 3, 2025.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and has a history of violence and substance use.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the evidence of the attending psychiatrist that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered that the accused remain subject to a detention disposition at the hospital, as a conditional discharge would be insufficient to manage her risk.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for multiple assault and mischief charges.

The Board found that the accused, who is diagnosed with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his lack of insight, history of medication non-adherence, and ongoing symptoms.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, denying a request for international travel passes.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for weapons dangerous, mischief, indecent act, and assaulting a peace officer.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, cannabis use disorder, and antisocial personality disorder, had shown notable clinical improvement while detained in a secure forensic unit.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of serious aggression when unwell and limited insight.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention with the addition of a privilege allowing for community living in approved accommodation to facilitate gradual reintegration.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including assault and mischief.

Based on a joint submission and uncontroverted psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused suffers from a major neurocognitive disorder and is permanently unfit to stand trial.

Given his secure placement in a long-term care facility and ongoing treatment, the Board concluded he no longer poses a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the accused returned to court for an inquiry into whether a stay of proceedings should be ordered.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for sexual assault and criminal harassment.

The accused, diagnosed with Bipolar Affective Disorder and Cannabis Use Disorder, has remained stable but continues to decline psychotropic medication and minimizes the risks of his past cannabis use.

The Board accepted the treatment team's evidence that the accused remains vulnerable to rapid decompensation without medication.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered the continuation of his Detention Order at a General Forensic Unit.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for two counts of second-degree murder, underwent an annual review of his Disposition by the Ontario Review Board.

The Board found that he continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his history of violence, maladaptive personality traits, and challenging behaviours in the hospital.

Given his complex medical needs and a request to be closer to family, the Board ordered his transfer from CAMH to St. Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton under a Detention Order with specific conditions.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for the accused, who was found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault due to schizophrenia.

The hospital recommended maintaining the Detention Order but increasing reporting frequency and allowing passes up to 48 hours to prepare for community transition.

All parties agreed with this joint position.

The Board accepted the recommendations, noting the accused's relative stability and the sensibility of the transitional planning.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for offences including possessing a weapon and uttering threats.

The accused sought a conditional discharge, while the Hospital and Crown recommended continuing his detention order with privileges.

The Board accepted the psychiatric evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his bipolar disorder, history of medication non-compliance, and risk of relapse.

The Board ordered that the accused continue to be detained at the hospital with privileges up to residing in approved community accommodation, finding this to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to protect the public.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for various offences including assault with a weapon.

The accused had a stable clinical year and was compliant with treatment, but remained overtly psychotic with paranoid and grandiose delusional beliefs.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his brittle mental illness and risk of medication non-adherence.

The Board ordered the continuation of his detention disposition at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, with privileges to live in approved accommodation in the community.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder due to paranoid schizophrenia.

The accused had been living independently in the community on a conditional discharge.

While he had made significant progress, he experienced a recent period of decompensation requiring hospitalization and had a tendency to delay reporting declines in his mental status.

The Board accepted the joint position of the parties and the treating psychiatrist's evidence, concluding that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge on the existing terms.

The appellant, J.A., appealed a decision of the Superior Court of Justice upholding a finding by the Consent and Capacity Board that he was incapable of consenting to treatment with antipsychotic medication.

The Court of Appeal found no reversible error in the lower court’s decision, upholding the dismissal of the appellant’s adjournment request and the application of the relevant legal principles regarding capacity and consent.

The appeal was dismissed.