R. v. Lebeau
Court headnote
R. v. Lebeau Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1992-11-06 Report [1992] 3 SCR 469 Case number 22702 Judges Lamer, Antonio; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley On appeal from Quebec Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 22702 Decision Content 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…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.scc-csc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
R. v. Lebeau Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1992-11-06 Report [1992] 3 SCR 469 Case number 22702 Judges Lamer, Antonio; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley On appeal from Quebec Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 22702 Decision Content 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.
Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca
R v Brown
[2022] 1 SCR 506