R. v. Lebeau, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 469
Her Majesty The Queen Appellant
v.
Jacques Lebeau Respondent
Indexed as: R. v. Lebeau
File No.: 22702.
1992: November 6.
Present: Lamer C.J. and L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Cory and McLachlin JJ.
on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec
Criminal law ‑‑ Arson ‑‑ Evidence ‑‑ No evidence to support trial judge's conclusion that accused had exclusive opportunity to set fire ‑‑ Acquittal entered by Court of Appeal upheld.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal, J.E. 91-1676, allowing the accused's appeal from his conviction on a charge of arson. Appeal dismissed.
Pierre Poulin and Claude Provost, for the appellant.
Philip Schneider, for the respondent.
//Lamer C.J.//
English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by
Lamer C.J. ‑‑ Despite your excellent presentation, Mr. Poulin, we are of the view that this appeal should be dismissed.
We essentially agree with the majority judges in the Court of Appeal.
There is no evidence of the presence of a retardant, other than speculation in this regard. This total lack of evidence makes the trial judge's conclusion that the accused had the exclusive opportunity to set the fire unreasonable, and this conclusion is necessary for a conviction having regard to the facts adduced in evidence in this case.
The appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Claude Provost and Pierre Poulin, Montréal.
Solicitors for the respondent: Patenaude, Dubois, Longueuil.