Umberto Agostino

The Ontario Review Board held an annual hearing for a patient found not criminally responsible for aggravated assault due to schizophrenia.

The hospital and Crown sought to maintain the current Detention Order, primarily to manage an imminent change in the patient's supportive housing.

The patient's counsel requested a Conditional Discharge.

Finding the patient stable, compliant with treatment, and without recent incidents of aggression, the Board concluded that a Conditional Discharge naming both the current and prospective residences was the least onerous and least restrictive disposition that protected public safety.

The accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault of a minor, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for an initial disposition hearing.

The Board accepted uncontradicted psychiatric evidence that the accused remains unfit due to a major mental illness, likely schizophrenia, and requires active hospital treatment.

Given the severe risk to public safety and the lack of community supports, the Board ordered the accused detained at the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre, with a transfer to the North Bay Health Centre pending bed availability in Thunder Bay.

Floyd Paypompee, previously found not criminally responsible for uttering threats, appeared before the Ontario Review Board for his annual hearing.

The Hospital and Crown recommended maintaining his current Detention Order, while the accused sought a Conditional Discharge.

The Board heard evidence from his treating psychiatrist regarding his continued cannabis use, non-compliance with residence rules, and the resulting risk to his housing.

The Board concluded that the accused continues to pose a significant threat to the public and that maintaining the current disposition best balances public protection and the accused's needs.

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

The accused has diagnoses of schizophrenia and mild intellectual disability.

The treating physician testified that the accused remains unfit and struggles with fitness education.

The Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial and ordered the continuation of the Detention Order at the hospital.

The Board also directed a pre-hearing conference in six months to review the accused's progress with alternative fitness programming.

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

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly submitted that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and that a detention order remains necessary and appropriate.

The Board accepted this joint submission and continued the detention order, while granting the accused's request to amend the disposition to permit potential travel passes to Red Lake, subject to the hospital's prior approval and investigation.

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

The accused was previously found not criminally responsible for assault and animal cruelty.

The hospital, the Attorney General, and the accused jointly recommended continuing the current Detention Order at the Thunder Bay Regional Health Sciences Centre.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to ongoing substance use issues, recent AWOL incidents, and a history of assaultive conduct.

The Board ordered the continuation of the Detention Order at the hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault and failure to comply with probation.

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia, was floridly psychotic and disorganized.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused remains unfit to stand trial.

The Board ordered the accused to be detained in the secure forensic unit of the hospital with privileges limited to escorted or accompanied passes on hospital grounds, prioritizing public safety and the accused's mental condition.

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

The accused, diagnosed with schizophrenia and other disorders, had a difficult year marked by violence and required ongoing seclusion.

However, his mental state had recently improved with medication optimization.

The Board accepted the uncontroverted evidence of the hospital's physician that the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing detention disposition at the secure forensic hospital.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused found not criminally responsible for uttering threats.

The hospital recommended continued detention with amended privileges to allow community access with approved persons.

The accused, who represented himself with the assistance of amicus curiae, argued he did not have a mental illness and requested a discharge.

The Board accepted the hospital's evidence that the accused lacked insight, remained symptomatic, and would likely decompensate without supervision.

The Board concluded the accused continued to pose a significant threat to public safety and ordered his continued detention with the requested privilege amendments.

The Ontario Review Board held an annual review hearing for an accused previously found unfit to stand trial on charges of sexual assault and forcible confinement.

The accused suffers from schizophrenia and major neurocognitive disorder, presenting with severe cognitive impairment and intermittent aggression.

Applying the test from R. v. Bharwani, the Board found the accused remains unfit to stand trial as he cannot understand the proceedings or communicate with counsel.

Based on uncontroverted medical evidence, the Board concluded the accused is permanently unfit and remains a significant threat to public safety.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order at the secure forensic unit.

The Ontario Review Board held an initial disposition hearing for an accused found unfit to stand trial on charges of committing indecent acts.

The assessing psychiatrist testified that the accused had become fit following medication optimization.

However, the Board rejected this opinion, finding the assessment inadequate and noting defense counsel's inability to meaningfully communicate with the accused.

The Board concluded the accused remained unfit to stand trial and ordered a Detention Order at the hospital, with privileges to live in the community to facilitate housing waitlists.

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

The accused was previously found unfit to stand trial on assault charges.

The Board considered evidence from the treating physician and applied the fitness test from R v Bharwani.

The Board concluded that the accused remains unfit to stand trial due to cognitive impairment and communication limitations, but is not permanently unfit as he has shown some improvement.

The Board ordered the continuation of the existing Detention Order, finding that the accused continues to represent a significant threat to public safety and requires a high degree of supervision.

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

The Board accepted expert evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to schizophrenia and a substance use disorder.

The Board ordered the continuation of a Detention Disposition as the least onerous and least restrictive option, but granted the accused's unopposed motion to transfer to St. Joseph's Healthcare in Hamilton to assist with his rehabilitation.

The Ontario Review Board convened a hearing to review a significant increase in the restrictions on the liberty of an NCR accused.

The accused, who had been living in an approved community residence, was involuntarily admitted to the hospital after exhibiting threatening and unmanageable behaviour, leading to his eviction from the residence.

The Board found that the hospital's decision to restrict the accused's liberty by detaining him in the Forensic Inpatient Unit was necessary to manage the risk he posed to himself and others.

The Board concluded that the restriction was the least onerous and least restrictive measure available in the circumstances.

The Ontario Review Board conducted a hearing to review the disposition of the accused, who was previously found unfit to stand trial on assault charges.

The hospital and the parties jointly submitted that the accused is permanently unfit and no longer poses a significant threat to public safety, largely due to a severe brain injury that left him with significant physical impairments.

The Board accepted the joint recommendation, continued the detention order permitting the accused to live in a 24-hour supervised accommodation, and directed that the matter be returned to court to consider staying the outstanding charges.

The Ontario Review Board held a mandatory review hearing for an accused previously found not criminally responsible for attempted murder and possession of stolen property.

The accused, diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, sought an absolute discharge but refused to attend the hearing or participate in a court-ordered violence risk assessment.

Relying on expert psychiatric and psychological evidence, the Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety due to a lack of insight, risk of medication non-compliance, and potential for substance abuse if unsupervised.

The Board ordered the continuation of the conditional discharge as the least onerous and least restrictive disposition.

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

The accused, previously found not criminally responsible for arson, had been subject to a detention order.

While the treating psychiatrist and the Hospital recommended continuing the detention order due to recent gambling and rule breaches, the majority of the Board found that the accused's risks were well-managed at her transitional residence.

Noting her five years of sobriety and overall positive trajectory, the majority ordered a Conditional Discharge.

A dissenting member would have maintained the detention order.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review for an accused found not criminally responsible for three charges of assault.

The accused, diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder and a developmental disorder, has resided in a hospital setting for most of his life.

The hospital and the Crown recommended the continuation of a detention order, citing ongoing episodes of emotional dysregulation and aggression towards staff, which the accused did not oppose.

The Board accepted the medical evidence that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of the detention order, while noting frustration over the delay in securing appropriate supportive housing.

The Ontario Review Board conducted an annual review of the accused's disposition following a finding of not criminally responsible for attempted murder.

The Board heard evidence that the accused had assaulted a vulnerable co-patient, threatened staff, and continued to use substances while detained at the hospital.

The Board found that the accused remains a significant threat to public safety and ordered the continuation of his detention order, declining to transfer him to a more secure facility at this time but noting that further violent behaviour could prompt an early review.

The accused was referred to the Ontario Review Board after being found unfit to stand trial on charges including sexual assault.

The accused suffers from a moderate developmental delay and schizoaffective disorder.

The Board unanimously found the accused unfit to stand trial, noting his inability to understand the judicial process or communicate effectively with counsel due to his mental disorder.

The Board ordered a Conditional Discharge, finding it to be the least onerous and least restrictive disposition necessary to protect public safety, with conditions including no contact with the victims and monthly reporting to the hospital.