Amero (Re)

Amero (Re)

The Court dismissed the appeal because the record amply supported the Ontario Review Board’s conclusion that the appellant continued to pose a significant risk to public safety and that continued detention on a secure forensic unit was the least onerous and restrictive disposition, so no error of law or principle...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2020 ONCA 370
Parties
Appellant: Klayton Amero; Respondent: Attorney General of Ontario; Respondent: Person in Charge of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Part Xx.1 of the Criminal Code / Appeal From Ontario Review Board Disposition (hearing in Writing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Ontario Review Board disposition continuing detention upheld
Legal Topics
Not Criminally Responsible (ncr), Risk to Public Safety, Disposition Appeals, Ontario Review Board Procedures
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Forensic Psychiatry Not Criminally Responsible (ncr) Risk to Public Safety Disposition Appeals Ontario Review Board Procedures

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Klayton Amero

Appellant

Attorney General of Ontario

Respondent

Person in Charge of St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Part Xx.1 of the Criminal Code / Appeal From Ontario Review Board Disposition (hearing in Writing)

  1. 1 Whether the Ontario Review Board erred in finding the appellant poses a significant risk to public safety under s.672.54 of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether continued detention was the least onerous and restrictive disposition available
  3. 3 Whether the Board applied an incorrect legal test or reversed the burden of proof

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the appeal because the record amply supported the Ontario Review Board’s conclusion that the appellant continued to pose a significant risk to public safety and that continued detention on a secure forensic unit was the least onerous and restrictive disposition, so no error of law or principle was made by the Board.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Ontario Review Board disposition continuing detention upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • The Ontario Review Board disposition dated October 30, 2019, continuing detention on a secure forensic unit is affirmed