S.F. Gehl

The accused was found unfit to stand trial on charges of dangerous driving causing bodily harm and failing to stop at an accident.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing.

Based on psychiatric evidence, the Board found the accused suffers from a major neurocognitive disorder, rendering him permanently unfit to stand trial.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge, requiring the accused to reside at a long-term care facility, and declined to impose abstain or submit clauses regarding alcohol and drugs, finding them unnecessary and overly onerous given his cognitive impairment and historical substance use.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing to determine whether the accused, who has schizophrenia and a history of complex delusions, was fit to stand trial.

The hospital and the Crown argued he remained unfit due to his belief that the legal system was rigged against him.

Applying the Supreme Court of Canada's recent decision in Bharwani, the Board found that while the accused held delusional beliefs, they did not overwhelm his ability to make decisions regarding his defence or instruct counsel.

The Board concluded the accused was fit to stand trial and directed that he be returned to court.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder in 2021 after killing her infant son during a major psychotic incident.

She appeared before the Ontario Review Board for a mandatory review of her conditional discharge.

The evidence demonstrated that her schizoaffective disorder was optimally treated, she had maintained stability in the community for several years, and she had robust professional and personal supports, including a voluntary Community Treatment Order.

The Board concluded that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to the safety of the public and ordered an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the disposition for an accused found not criminally responsible for multiple offences including robbery.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and a substance use disorder, had a history of absconding and relapsing into substance use, which exacerbated his psychotic symptoms.

Relying on the uncontroverted evidence of the treating psychiatric team, the Board concluded that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order to provide necessary supervision during his transition to community living.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for assault and threatening bodily harm.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and substance use disorder.

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

The Board ordered a continued detention disposition with privileges, noting the need to assess the accused's ability to live independently and manage his symptoms before considering a conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault and weapons offences.

The accused, who has schizophrenia and an intellectual disability, remains detained at a forensic mental health centre.

The Board accepted uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused remains treatment resistant and would pose a moderate to high risk to public safety without forensic supervision.

The Board concluded the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered a continued Detention Disposition with minor modifications to community access privileges.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for violent offences.

The accused had made significant progress over the past five years, remaining stable, medication-compliant, and substance-free while living in the community.

Relying on uncontroverted expert psychiatric evidence, the Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to his history of violence and mental illness.

However, considering his progress, the Board ordered a conditional discharge as the least onerous and restrictive disposition.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for offences including uttering threats and assault with intent to resist arrest.

At his initial disposition hearing before the Ontario Review Board, the uncontradicted psychiatric evidence established that his schizophrenia was well-managed in the community through long-acting injectable medication and a Community Treatment Order.

The Board found that the accused did not pose a significant threat to the safety of the public and granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The hospital, Crown, and accused jointly submitted that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

Relying on the testimony of the attending forensic psychiatrist and the accused's sustained stability, treatment adherence, and lack of symptoms, the Board concluded the accused did not pose a real and substantial risk to the public.

An absolute discharge was granted.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for assault by choking and was discharged on conditions.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the hospital's attending psychiatrist testified that the accused's schizophrenia and substance use disorder were in partial remission, he had strong community support, and he no longer posed a significant threat to public safety.

The Crown and the accused supported the hospital's recommendation.

The Board unanimously accepted the psychiatric evidence, found the accused did not pose a significant threat to the safety of the public, and granted an absolute discharge.

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

The accused, who suffers from schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, had previously choked his mother due to command hallucinations.

The treating psychiatrist testified that the accused's mental status had significantly improved and his medications were optimized, though he still required the structure of a hospital setting.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties and ordered the continuation of the detention order with amended privileges, including the possibility of residing in approved accommodation in the community once transitioned.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault.

The hospital and Crown recommended continuing the conditional discharge due to recent signs of the accused disengaging from treatment, despite his medication compliance and lack of violence.

The Board concluded that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety, citing his strong family support, medication adherence, and the willingness of his family physician to oversee his treatment.

An absolute discharge was granted.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition.

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and other offences, was subject to a Conditional Discharge.

Due to recent medication non-adherence, increased substance use, and decompensation, the hospital recommended a Detention Disposition.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public and that a Conditional Discharge was no longer sufficient to manage his risk.

The Board ordered a Detention Disposition at the Southwest Centre for Forensic Mental Health Care.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for assault and other offences.

The hospital and the Crown jointly submitted that the accused no longer posed a significant threat to public safety and should receive an absolute discharge.

The Board rejected the joint submission, finding that the accused's bipolar disorder remained unstable, his medication regimen required frequent adjustments, and his risk management relied heavily on the tenuous support of his common-law partner.

Concluding that the accused continued to pose a significant threat, the Board ordered a Detention Order.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for sexual assault.

The hospital and the Attorney General recommended maintaining the current detention disposition at a high secure facility, while the accused sought a transfer to a medium security facility.

Relying on uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused remained volatile, frequently non-compliant with medication, and lacked insight, the Board found he continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered his continued detention at the Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care with no changes to his privileges.

The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of aggravated assault.

At his initial Ontario Review Board hearing, the hospital and the Crown submitted that the accused was now fit to stand trial and sought a keep fit order detaining him in hospital pending his return to court.

The accused agreed he was fit but opposed the keep fit order.

The Board found the accused fit to stand trial, noting his ability to answer the Taylor test questions and understand the proceedings.

Given his history of fluctuating fitness and the stabilizing effect of the hospital environment, the Board ordered that he be sent back to court without delay and remain subject to the Warrant of Committal in hospital to maintain his fitness.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to restrict the liberty of an accused previously found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder and arson.

The accused had been living in the community but was readmitted to the hospital after police found him consuming alcohol and cannabis in violation of his disposition, following allegations of harassment.

The Board accepted expert psychiatric evidence that the accused was experiencing acute decompensation of a bipolar-related disorder exacerbated by substance use and suboptimal treatment.

The Board concluded that both the initial and ongoing restrictions of liberty were warranted, necessary, and the least onerous interventions available to protect public safety.

The Board also approved joint submissions to amend the disposition to include specific no-contact provisions.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review a restriction of liberty (ROL) imposed on the accused, who had been living in the community but was readmitted to the hospital due to decompensation and substance use.

The hospital sought to stabilize the accused while awaiting a more supportive housing placement.

The Board found that the ROL was necessary and warranted to protect the public and prevent further decline in the accused's mental state.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current disposition, noting the accused remains a significant threat to public safety but supporting his transition to new supportive housing.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges including assaulting police with a weapon and dangerous driving.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizophrenia, continued to experience grandiose and persecutory delusions and believed his charges had been withdrawn.

Applying the contextual test for fitness, the Board found the accused remained unable to conduct a defence or instruct counsel due to his mental disorder.

Concluding that the accused posed a significant threat to public safety and lacked community supports, the Board ordered his detention in hospital with privileges for indirectly supervised entry into the community.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory annual review of the accused's disposition under s. 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code.

The accused, who was previously found NCR for assault and threatening bodily harm, had a positive year living in a supervised group home.

The treatment team recommended continuing the detention order with expanded privileges, including indirectly supervised 72-hour passes, to facilitate community integration.

The Board accepted the joint submission of the parties, finding that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and that the continued detention order is the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.