TORONTO -- There is no place in a criminal trial in Canada to declare a defendant "factually innocent," the Ontario Court of Appeal has concluded.

The court repeated its view on this issue in brief written reasons released Friday, to explain why it overturned the murder conviction of William Mullins-Johnson earlier this week and ordered an acquittal.

Mr. Mullins-Johnson was wrongly convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering his four-year-old niece Valin at her home in Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., in 1993. He spent 12 years in prison before he was released on bail in 2005.

His lawyer James Lockyer asked the Court of Appeal to declare Mr. Mullins-Johnson factually innocent of the crime.

The appeal court declined and in its reasons released Friday, explained the purpose of criminal proceedings in Canada.

"The criminal trial is to determine whether the Crown has proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt. If so, the accused is guilty. If not, the accused is found not guilty. There is no finding of factual innocence since it would not fall within the ambit or purpose of criminal law," wrote Justices Dennis O'Connor, Marc Rosenberg and Robert Sharpe.

"There are not in Canadian law two kinds of acquittals," said the court, which explained that declarations of factual innocence could "degrade" the meaning of the not guilty verdict.

While Mr. Mullins-Johnson was not declared innocent, the appeal court stressed there was no evidence his niece was murdered and he was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.

The court singled out the flawed findings of pathologist Dr. Charles Smith and two other doctors who concluded the young girl had been murdered.

Mr. Mullins-Johnson was the victim of "an inexorable rush to judgment," the court stated.

The Ontario coroner's office conducted a second review of the work of Mr. Smith in 2005 and found he made errors in more than a dozen cases that resulted in criminal convictions.

The injuries observed on Valin were either normal in death or caused by the autopsy and not a result of an assault, concluded Dr. Michael Pollanen, Ontario's chief forensic pathologist. His findings were supported by five other experts.

Michal Fairburn, a senior Crown attorney, apologized to Mr. Mullins-Johnson on behalf of the Ministry of the Attorney General at the court hearing on Oct. 15.

The Court of Appeal said it hoped the apology will "provide solace" to Mr. Mullins-Johnson.

After the hearing last Monday, Mr. Mullins-Johnson said he was surprised by the apology but will try to accept it as part of his healing.

The conduct of the Ministry of the Attorney-General is likely to come under scrutiny in a judicial inquiry into Mr. Smith and pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario, scheduled to start next month.