The Discipline Committee of the College of Nurses of Ontario has ordered the immediate revocation of Joseph Mark Ohlmann’s certificate of registration after he was found guilty of professional misconduct related to a criminal conviction for arranging a sexual offence1. The panel also found Ohlmann committed misconduct by failing to report both his criminal charges and the subsequent conviction to the College as required by law. Ohlmann, who was registered as a Registered Nurse from January 1991 until his registration expired in March 2024, had previously worked for the Correctional Services of Canada until 2022.
The discipline hearing was held by videoconference on March 13, 2025. At the hearing, Ohlmann admitted to all five allegations of professional misconduct detailed in the Notice of Hearing. The panel conducted a plea inquiry and was satisfied that his admissions were voluntary, informed, and unequivocal. The allegations were subsequently proven based on an Agreed Statement of Facts presented jointly by counsel for the College and counsel for Ohlmann.
The facts giving rise to the misconduct began in March 2021. Between March 12 and March 17, 2021, Ohlmann accessed a social media platform and engaged in communications with an individual who was, unknown to him, an undercover police officer. During these communications, Ohlmann arranged to meet the individual at a hotel for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity with the police officer’s fictional 12-year-old daughter. The Agreed Statement of Facts confirmed that Ohlmann booked a hotel room on March 16, 2021. When he arrived at the hotel on March 17, 2021, he was arrested by police.
Following his arrest, Ohlmann was charged with two counts of agreeing or arranging, by means of telecommunication, to commit a sexual offence against a person under 16 years of age, contrary to section 172.2(1)(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada. The underlying offences he arranged to commit were sexual interference and sexual assault.
On January 10, 2023, in the Ontario Court of Justice in Peterborough, Ohlmann was found guilty of both criminal counts. The matter then proceeded to sentencing on September 8, 2023. He was sentenced in relation to the first count, while the second count was stayed based on the Kienapple principle, which prevents multiple convictions for a single criminal act. The court imposed a sentence of 16 months of imprisonment, to be followed by a two-year period of probation.
In addition to the jail term and probation, the court issued several ancillary orders. These included a requirement to provide a DNA sample, placement on the national Sex Offender Registry for a period of 10 years, and a five-year ban under section 161 of the Criminal Code from interacting with persons under the age of 16 in various capacities. The orders also included a five-year restriction on his use of computers, the internet, and related technology.
Separate from the criminal conduct itself, the College of Nurses of Ontario pursued allegations related to Ohlmann’s failure to report his legal situation. The Agreed Statement of Facts confirmed that Ohlmann did not report the criminal charges against him from March 2021, nor did he report his findings of guilt from January 2023. The College first became aware of the situation not from Ohlmann, but through an anonymous email received on March 18, 2021, the day after his arrest, which advised that Ohlmann had been criminally charged.
This failure to report formed the basis of several distinct allegations of professional misconduct. The Notice of Hearing alleged that Ohlmann contravened a term, condition, or limitation on his certificate of registration by failing to report the March 2021 charges to the College’s Executive Director, as required by Ontario Regulation 275/94. He was further alleged to have contravened his registration conditions, as well as section 85.6.1 of the Health Professions Procedural Code, by failing to report the January 2023 findings of guilt.
The final allegation stated that by failing to report both the charges and the findings of guilt, Ohlmann engaged in conduct that would reasonably be regarded by members of the profession as disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional. The primary allegation, however, was that the criminal conviction itself was an act of professional misconduct under the Health Professions Procedural Code, as the offences were relevant to his suitability to practice nursing.
In its decision, the Discipline Panel accepted Ohlmann’s admissions and the Agreed Statement of Facts. The panel found that the criminal offences, which involved agreeing to commit sexual interference and sexual assault, were “fundamentally incompatible with the ethical and professional standards expected of members of a regulated health care profession.” The panel concurred with prior decisions that findings of guilt for sexual offences are directly relevant to the practice of nursing.
The panel also made findings on the reporting failures. It confirmed that Ohlmann breached a condition of his certificate of registration by failing to report his charges in 2021. It likewise found he breached his registration conditions and the Health Professions Procedural Code by failing to report his conviction in 2023.
Regarding the allegation of disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional conduct, the panel found that Ohlmann’s failures to report demonstrated a “serious and persistent disregard for his professional obligations.” The panel characterized the failure as “dishonourable,” stating it demonstrated an element of “dishonesty and deceit.” The panel also found the conduct to be “disgraceful” as it “shames the Member and by extension the profession.” The decision stated that the conduct “casts serious doubt on the Member’s moral fitness and inherent ability to discharge the higher obligations the public expects professionals to meet.”
Following the findings of misconduct, counsel for the College and Ohlmann’s counsel presented a Joint Submission on Order. The jointly proposed penalty included two parts: first, that Ohlmann be required to appear before the panel for an oral reprimand, and second, that the College’s Executive Director be directed to immediately revoke Ohlmann’s certificate of registration.
Counsel for the College submitted that this penalty was not only appropriate but mandatory. Under section 51(5.2)(a) of the Health Professions Procedural Code, when a member is found guilty of professional misconduct based on a conviction for a prescribed offence set out in regulation, the panel must, at a minimum, order both a reprimand and revocation. The offences Ohlmann was convicted of are listed as prescribed offences under Ontario Regulation 262/18.
The College identified the serious, criminal nature of the conduct and the breach of public trust as aggravating factors. It also noted the two separate breaches of his reporting obligations. In mitigation, the College acknowledged Ohlmann’s cooperation with the hearing, his admissions, and his lack of any prior disciplinary history with the College.
Ohlmann’s counsel agreed that the proposed penalty was mandatory under the Code and urged the panel to accept the joint submission. Counsel also noted that Ohlmann had spent 30 months on bail without issue, had received 30 hours of counseling, and was in a supportive relationship, which was submitted as a protective factor.
The Discipline Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Order. The panel referenced the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Anthony-Cook, noting the high threshold for departing from a joint submission, and found the proposed penalty was not contrary to the public interest and would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
In its reasons for the penalty, the panel confirmed that because the convictions were for prescribed sexual offences, the mandatory penalty terms of a reprimand and revocation were required by statute. The panel concluded that the penalty was reasonable and served the public interest by promoting confidence in the College’s ability to regulate the profession. The revocation was found to satisfy the goal of general deterrence by sending a clear message to all nurses, as well as specific deterrence, as Ohlmann can no longer practice as a nurse. The panel stated that the public is protected because revocation is the “strongest form of public protection.” The panel ordered that Ohlmann appear for his reprimand within three months and directed the immediate revocation of his certificate of registration.
Read more cases about proceedings in regulated professions here.
