Appellant was under supervision of the Alberta Review Board (ARB) for approximately four years after being found NCR for arson committed at age 16. Appellant argued that the treatment team’s recommendations did not correctly state the legal test, and did not address whether he was a “significant threat to the safety of the public”, and gave no consideration to what would be the “least restrictive” disposition consistent with the objectives of the Criminal Code.

Held: Appeal allowed; matter remitted back to ARB.

The ARB stated that it agreed with the treatment team’s opinion and found that the appellant was a significant threat to the safety of the public. “Merely reciting the recommendations of the treatment team, and then accepting them, will not be sufficient if it is unclear if the team applied the right legal test, or whether the Board has actually turned its mind to that test.”

T. Hiebert – Defence Counsel