R. v. Jones

Parties

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Post Trial Determination of Criminal Responsibility (ncr/md) and Sentencing; S.672.11 Assessment Ordered

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether there were reasonable grounds to order a s.672.11 forensic psychiatric assessment after trial
2. 2 Whether specific offences meet the s.16(1) threshold for NCR/MD
3. 3 Whether the court should make disposition or refer to the Criminal Code Review Board under ss.672.45/672.47

Ratio Decidendi

The judge accepted the qualified forensic psychiatric opinion that the accused suffered from a delusional (psychotic) disorder and on a balance of probabilities found the accused not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder for specific post-March 2010 offences (assaults and threats against Shealynn Rogers; March 9, 2011 assault of Niala; Dawn Street and Walmart assaults) but found the accused criminally responsible for earlier incidents (plastic broom and Bank of Montreal assaults) and resisting arrest; the NCR findings were entered and the NCR counts were referred to the Criminal Code Review Board for disposition while sentencing for the convictions was scheduled.

Court Disposition

Verdicts of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder entered for specified post-March 2010 offences; convictions entered for earlier assaults and resisting arrest; NCR counts referred to Criminal Code Review Board for disposition; sentencing for convictions scheduled.

Orders

• Ordered forensic psychiatric assessment under s.672.11 and remand to the East Coast Forensic Hospital
• Verdicts of not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder entered for: threats and assault against Shealynn Rogers (counts 2 and 3); March 9, 2011 assault of Niala Jones (count 4); Dawn Street assault (count 8); Walmart assault (count 9)