S. Kim

The young person, convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to the maximum youth sentence, appeared for an automatic annual review of his sentence under s. 94(1) of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

The Crown sought to confirm the sentence, while the defence sought a conversion of the remaining custodial portion from secure to open custody.

The court found that the young person had made significant progress in rehabilitation, completed his high school diploma, and exhausted available programming in secure custody.

The court ordered that the remaining custodial portion of the sentence be served in open custody to facilitate his reintegration into the community.

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

The accused has diagnoses of schizoaffective disorder, intellectual disability, and substance use disorders, and has a history of violent conduct while under the Board's jurisdiction.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the safety of the public, as he would likely become non-compliant with medication and relapse into substance use without supervision.

The Board ordered the continuation of the current detention disposition, denying the accused's request to amend the disposition to allow the use of cannabis under medical supervision.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for assault with a weapon and assault.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had a successful year in the community with no hospital readmissions, maintained abstinence, and complied with treatment.

The Board accepted the attending psychiatrist's uncontroverted evidence that the accused's mental state remains fragile and he would rapidly decompensate without forensic oversight.

The Board found the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered a loosened conditional discharge.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the hospital's decision to readmit the accused and restrict his liberties following a positive urine drug screen for methamphetamines.

The accused, who has a history of substance-induced psychosis and schizophrenia, denied substance use and alleged his urine samples were tampered with.

The Board found the accused's testimony lacked credibility and upheld the hospital's decision, concluding that the readmission and ongoing restriction of liberties were warranted and represented the least restrictive means to stabilize his mental state and manage his risk to public safety.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for second-degree murder.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, had a history of treatment non-compliance and substance abuse.

The hospital recommended a continued detention disposition with an increased reporting frequency, while working towards a community housing placement.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted psychiatric evidence that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a detention disposition with privileges up to living in the community, emphasizing the need for a cautious approach to his transition to less structured housing.

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

The accused, diagnosed with Delusional Disorder, had made significant progress and was compliant with antipsychotic medication.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety due to marginal insight and the risk of relapse if untreated.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order but added privileges for community living and indirectly supervised passes to facilitate gradual reintegration.

The accused, who was found not criminally responsible for arson, was subject to an annual review by the Ontario Review Board.

The accused sought an absolute discharge, arguing he was no longer a significant threat to public safety.

The hospital and the Attorney General sought a continuation of the detention order.

The Board found that the accused's ongoing substance use, particularly crack cocaine, acted as a destabilizer that increased his risk of psychiatric decompensation and violence.

Applying the Winko framework, the Board concluded the accused remained a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the detention order as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a mandatory annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for sexual assault.

The accused has a complex psychiatric history, including schizoaffective disorder, an acquired brain injury, and a substance use disorder, alongside an extensive criminal record.

While the accused had a positive year with medication adherence and substance abstinence, the Board found he remains a significant threat to public safety due to his risk of decompensation and reoffending without forensic structure.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, allowing the hospital to manage his transition to appropriate community housing.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for assault and assaulting a police officer.

The accused, diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder, had a history of medication noncompliance and violence when unwell.

Although his condition improved significantly after starting Clozapine, he continued to exhibit residual disorganization, mild paranoia, and limited insight.

The Board accepted the medical evidence that the accused would likely discontinue medication and deteriorate rapidly without the supervision of the forensic service.

The Board found that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his Detention Order as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The accused was charged with murder and brought an application for a stay of proceedings based on late disclosure and abuse of process.

The Crown failed to disclose critical DNA evidence identifying the victim's brother's DNA on a mask recovered at the scene, which had been in police possession since January 7, 2025, but was not disclosed until September 9, 2025, on the eve of trial.

Additionally, the Crown failed to timely disclose cell tower evidence and corresponding witness statements necessary to establish the accused's identity as the suspect.

The court found serious violations of the accused's section 7 Charter rights and determined that the Crown's pattern of negligence, apathy, and late preparation constituted an abuse of process that undermined the integrity of the justice system.

A stay of proceedings was granted as the only appropriate remedy.

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

The accused, who has a long history of untreated schizophrenia and homelessness, sought an absolute discharge.

The hospital and Crown sought a continuation of the detention order.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety, as she would likely decompensate and become violent if discharged without stable housing and psychiatric support.

The Board ordered a continued Detention Order with unchanged terms as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for the accused, who was previously found not criminally responsible for flight from a peace officer and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and polysubstance use disorder.

The Board found that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to the safety of the public due to his major mental illness, substance use history, and limited insight.

The Board ordered that the accused remain detained at the hospital with the same privileges as the previous disposition.

The Board also considered whether to order a Gladue Report given the accused's Indigenous heritage, but declined to do so at this time, noting the extensive information already available and the accused's hesitation to participate in the potentially intrusive process.

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

The accused had been living in an independent apartment, remained abstinent from substances, and complied with his medication regimen.

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

The Board agreed, noting the accused's sustained progress, strong family support, and a robust community support plan including a Community Treatment Order.

The accused was granted an absolute discharge.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for first-degree murder in 1979.

The accused, diagnosed with Schizoaffective Disorder, had a history of unprovoked assaults while detained, including a 2021 assault on his psychiatrist.

The treatment team reported recent stability following a hospital transfer but cautioned that his risk of violence remained high without a structured forensic environment.

The Board found the accused continues to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered a continuation of the Detention Order but granted indirectly supervised hospital and grounds privileges as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition, while denying community passes.

The accused was found not criminally responsible for arson after setting fire to his home while experiencing hallucinations related to Parkinson's Disease.

At the initial disposition hearing, the Hospital and Attorney General recommended a detention order, while the accused sought a conditional discharge.

The Review Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to his cognitive decline, history of alcohol use, and lack of insight.

A detention order was imposed to allow the Hospital to assess his medical needs, medication compliance, and appropriate supportive housing.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing to review the restriction of the accused's liberties after his hospital privileges were suspended.

The accused, who has delusional disorder, was administered long-acting antipsychotic medication against his will after his appeals regarding incapacity to consent to treatment were exhausted.

Due to his resulting agitation, aggression, and expressed desire to flee the country, the hospital suspended his level 3 privileges.

The Board found that the restriction of liberties was warranted given the risk of elopement and his aggressive behaviour, noting that privileges were restored once his condition stabilized.

The hospital requested an early hearing to review the accused's disposition, asserting he was now fit to stand trial.

The Ontario Review Board held a hearing and, based on expert psychiatric evidence, found that the accused's schizophrenia symptoms had improved and he could meaningfully participate in his criminal proceedings.

The Board ordered the accused returned to court and issued a Keep Fit Order to ensure his stability is maintained at the hospital pending trial.

The accused, Alex Beseiso, applied for a stay of proceedings on the basis of a breach of his right to be tried within a reasonable time under section 11(b) of the Charter.

The court reviewed the timeline of the proceedings, including periods of delay and the reasons for them, and found that the majority of the delay was attributable to the defence, particularly due to the accused's absence from Canada and failure to attend his trial.

The application for a stay was dismissed.

Vera Kasotty pleaded guilty to Fraud Over $5000 and Arson, charges arising from an organized crime investigation into staged motor vehicle collisions for insurance fraud.

The Crown sought a jail term of two years less a day, while the defence argued for a conditional sentence of the same duration.

The court considered the principles of general deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation.

Despite the seriousness of the offences and their connection to organized crime, the judge found that a conditional sentence could adequately reflect sentencing principles given Kasotty's relative role, remorse, restitution, and lack of prior criminal record.

The Crown applied to remove defence counsel for a young person charged with second degree murder, alleging a conflict of interest because counsel also represented a Crown witness on unrelated charges.

The witness had given a confusing police statement suggesting the accused might be involved, but later testified at the preliminary hearing that he had no direct communication with the accused.

Both the accused and the witness provided informed waivers consenting to the representation.

The court dismissed the application, finding no realistic risk of adversity in interest and noting that independent counsel could cross-examine the witness if necessary.