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.