The appellant, Winsome Hurditt, appealed a finding of not criminally responsible (NCR) for criminal harassment and mischief, following a trial where she was found guilty.
The trial judge, after ordering an NCR assessment, made an NCR finding but provided insufficient reasons, which the appellant argued prevented meaningful appellate review.
The respondent conceded the deficiency but sought to apply the proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code.
The Superior Court of Justice, Summary Conviction Appeal Court, allowed the appeal, ruling that the absence of comprehensible reasons for an NCR finding constituted a substantial wrong, making the proviso inapplicable.
The court set aside the NCR finding and convictions and ordered a new trial before a different judge.
