When the fire causes injury or death, the penalties escalate dramatically, and additional charges such as attempted murder, manslaughter, or felony murder may be added. Florida law also criminalizes conduct well short of actually setting a fire: possessing fire accelerants or incendiary devices with intent to commit arson is itself a felony. The prosecution builds arson cases through fire investigation reports, accelerant analysis, witness testimony, surveillance footage, and financial motive evidence, but each of these categories of evidence can be challenged. A Stuart arson lawyer at The Rubin Firm defends individuals facing arson charges in Martin County by challenging the fire investigation methodology, the accelerant evidence, the intent element, and the identification of the defendant as the person responsible for the fire.
Arson charges carry severe penalties. Call The Rubin Firm at (772) 283-2004, complete our contact form, or start a live chat.
How Florida Defines Arson
Florida’s arson statutes are found in Florida Statutes Chapter 806. The state defines arson as the willful and unlawful, or while in the commission of a felony, damaging or causing to be damaged by fire or explosion any dwelling, structure, or property. The statute creates two degrees of arson with different elements and penalties.
injured? Let Us Help You Get Justice. Free consultation. No fees unless we win your case.
The Fire Investigation: Where Arson Cases Are Built and Challenged
Arson cases are built on the conclusions of fire investigators who examine the burn patterns, physical evidence, and circumstances of the fire to determine whether it was set intentionally. Fire investigation is a specialized discipline that has undergone significant scientific scrutiny in recent decades, and many of the techniques that investigators once relied on to identify arson have been debunked or significantly modified by modern fire science research.
The Rubin Firm retains independent fire investigation experts who review the state’s fire investigation report, visit the fire scene when possible, examine the physical evidence, and evaluate whether the investigator’s conclusions are supported by current fire science methodology. In many cases, what the state’s investigator characterizes as evidence of an intentionally set fire can be explained by accidental causes, electrical malfunctions, natural fire behavior, or outdated investigative techniques that modern science has discredited.
Common Arson Defenses
Insurance fraud defense:
When the prosecution alleges a financial motive, we challenge the evidence of motive and present alternative explanations for the fire.
Accidental fire:
The fire was caused by an electrical fault, a cooking accident, a natural gas leak, a lightning strike, or other accidental cause, not by intentional conduct.
Challenging the fire investigation:
The investigator’s methodology was flawed, relied on outdated techniques, or reached conclusions not supported by the physical evidence and current fire science.
Challenging accelerant evidence:
Accelerant detection by laboratory analysis or fire scene examination can produce false positives from petroleum-based products that are lawfully present in the structure, such as gasoline stored in a garage, cleaning solvents, or petroleum-based building materials.
Lack of intent:
The fire was set without the willful intent to destroy property, or the fire spread beyond what the defendant intended or anticipated.
Mistaken identity:
The defendant was not the person who set the fire. Arson scenes are chaotic, witnesses may be unreliable, and the prosecution must prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt.
Arson and Insurance Fraud
A significant percentage of arson prosecutions involve allegations that the defendant set the fire to collect insurance proceeds. These cases combine the arson charge with fraud charges, creating compound felony exposure. The prosecution builds the motive case through financial records showing the defendant was under financial stress, evidence that the insured property was overvalued, evidence that valuable items were removed from the property before the fire, and the timing of insurance policy changes relative to the fire. The Rubin Firm challenges financial motive evidence by presenting alternative explanations for the defendant’s financial situation and the circumstances surrounding the fire, and by retaining forensic accountants who can analyze the financial evidence from the defense perspective.
Penalties Summary
Why The Rubin Firm for Arson Defense
Arson defense requires an attorney who understands fire science, forensic chemistry, and the specific investigative techniques used by fire marshals and arson investigators. At The Rubin Firm, we approach arson cases with the understanding that the prosecution’s case is only as strong as the fire investigation that supports it, and that fire investigations are frequently flawed, incomplete, or based on outdated methodology that does not withstand scrutiny under current scientific standards.
We retain independent, certified fire investigation experts who apply NFPA 921 methodology to evaluate the state’s conclusions. We retain forensic chemists who can independently analyze accelerant evidence and challenge the state’s laboratory findings. We work with financial forensic experts to counter the prosecution’s insurance fraud motive theory. And we build the defense around the science, because arson cases are ultimately decided by whether the prosecution can prove, through reliable scientific evidence, that the fire was intentionally set rather than accidental. When the science does not support the prosecution’s theory, we present that gap to the judge and jury with clarity and conviction.
Our approach to arson defense also includes thorough investigation of the defendant’s alibi, electronic and digital evidence that may place the defendant elsewhere at the time the fire was set, witness testimony from neighbors and other individuals who may have observed the fire or the events leading up to it, and the defendant’s prior relationship with the property. Every piece of evidence that contradicts the prosecution’s narrative becomes a building block in the defense, and The Rubin Firm leaves no stone unturned in constructing the strongest possible case for our clients.
Steps to Take If Accused of Arson
Do not speak to investigators:
Fire investigators and law enforcement will attempt to interview you. Invoke your right to remain silent and request an attorney.
Preserve any evidence of innocence:
Receipts, photographs, alibi evidence, and documentation that shows you were elsewhere when the fire started.
Contact The Rubin Firm:
Arson investigations are complex and move quickly. Early attorney involvement allows us to retain independent fire experts and challenge the investigation from the beginning. Call (772) 283-2004.
The Evolution of Fire Science and Its Impact on Arson Defense
The field of fire investigation has undergone a significant transformation in recent decades. Traditional fire investigation relied heavily on visual indicators such as V-patterns, pour patterns, alligator charring, crazed glass, and low burn points to identify the origin and cause of a fire. Many of these indicators were long believed to prove the presence of accelerants and, by extension, intentional fire-setting. However, modern fire science research, particularly the work published by the National Fire Protection Association in NFPA 921 (Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations), has demonstrated that many of these traditional indicators are unreliable and can be produced by natural fire behavior without the presence of any accelerant.
This evolution in fire science has led to the reversal of numerous arson convictions nationwide, including cases where individuals served decades in prison based on fire investigation conclusions that modern science has shown to be fundamentally flawed. The National Academy of Sciences, the Innocence Project, and numerous academic researchers have documented the unreliability of traditional fire investigation methods and advocated for the adoption of science-based approaches that follow the NFPA 921 methodology. The Rubin Firm stays current with these developments and retains fire investigation experts who apply the most current scientific standards to evaluate the state’s arson conclusions. When the prosecution’s fire investigator relies on outdated methods or draws conclusions not supported by modern fire science, we challenge those conclusions with the authoritative scientific literature that contradicts them.
Accelerant Detection and Laboratory Analysis
When fire investigators suspect that an accelerant such as gasoline, kerosene, or lighter fluid was used to start a fire, they collect samples from the fire scene and submit them to a forensic laboratory for analysis using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). This laboratory analysis can identify the chemical compounds present in the sample and determine whether an ignitable liquid is among them. However, the presence of an ignitable liquid in a fire scene sample does not automatically prove arson. Gasoline stored in a garage, petroleum-based flooring adhesives, paint thinners, cleaning solvents, and many other common household and commercial products contain the same chemical compounds that accelerants do. The laboratory analysis identifies what chemicals are present, but it cannot determine how those chemicals came to be at the fire scene or whether they were placed there intentionally to start a fire.
The Rubin Firm challenges accelerant evidence by examining the laboratory analysis methodology, the chain of custody for the collected samples, the potential for contamination during collection and storage, and the alternative explanations for the presence of ignitable liquid residues in the fire scene. We also examine whether the fire investigator properly documented the sample collection process, whether appropriate comparison samples were taken from areas unaffected by the fire, and whether the laboratory followed accredited procedures in its analysis. Each of these elements can reveal weaknesses in the prosecution’s accelerant evidence that create reasonable doubt.
Arson and Related Criminal Charges
Arson charges frequently come bundled with related offenses that increase the defendant’s total legal exposure. Insurance fraud charges may accompany arson allegations when the prosecution believes the fire was set to collect insurance proceeds. Attempted murder or aggravated assault charges may be added when the fire is set in an occupied building, based on the theory that the defendant intended to harm the occupants or acted with reckless disregard for their safety. Criminal mischief charges may be added for damage to property. And if a death results from the fire, felony murder charges carrying life imprisonment or the death penalty can be filed against everyone involved in setting the fire and anyone who aided or abetted the arson, regardless of whether they intended or anticipated the death. The compound nature of these charges creates a sentencing exposure that can easily reach decades or life in prison, making arson one of the most consequential categories of criminal charges in the Florida system.
We’re Here To Heil You Recover Compensation For:
- Injury or damages
- Injury & Medical
- Injury or damages
Serving Stuart, Martin County, and the Treasure Coast
The Rubin Firm defends individuals facing arson charges in Stuart and throughout Martin, St. Lucie, Indian River, and Palm Beach Counties.
Referral Partnerships
Attorneys trust The Rubin Firm for arson defense referrals. Contact us.
Frequently Asked Questions About Arson in Stuart
Is arson always a felony in Florida?
Yes. First-degree arson (dwelling) is a first-degree felony carrying up to 30 years. Second-degree arson (structure or property) is a second-degree felony carrying up to 15 years. Even possession of fire accelerants with intent to commit arson is a third-degree felony.
What if the fire was accidental?
Arson requires proof that the fire was set willfully and unlawfully. If the fire was caused by an accident, electrical malfunction, natural event, or other non-intentional cause, the arson charge should not stand. Independent fire investigation experts can evaluate whether the evidence supports an accidental origin.
Can arson be charged as murder?
Yes. Under Florida’s felony murder rule, if someone dies as a result of arson, the person who set the fire can be charged with first-degree murder, even if the death was unintended. First-degree murder carries life imprisonment or the death penalty.
What evidence does the prosecution use in arson cases?
Fire investigation reports, burn pattern analysis, accelerant testing, witness testimony, surveillance footage, financial records (for insurance fraud motive), cell phone location data, and statements made by the defendant.
Can fire investigation conclusions be challenged?
Yes. Modern fire science has debunked many traditional fire investigation techniques. Independent fire experts retained by the defense can challenge the state investigator’s methodology, conclusions, and the interpretation of physical evidence using current scientific standards.
$150 Million
Accused of Arson? The Science Can Be Challenged.
Arson convictions depend on fire investigation conclusions that are increasingly questioned by modern science. The Stuart arson defense lawyers at The Rubin Firm retain independent experts and challenge every aspect of the prosecution’s case.
Call (772) 283-2004. Complete our form or chat live.
4.9 Rating on 
