Life Insurance - Inheritance Dispute regarding Scott Peterson

The killer statute has acutally come up a couple times this year with advice I have given potential clients regarded Florida probate situations earlier this year. This is a little different angle than the OJ case since Scott Peterson was actually found guilty of murder it would seem obvious under any state killer statute preventing people from inheriting as a result of their action he would not be able to inherit but the interesting slant in this case is that Scott Peterson and Mark Garagos still claim his innocence and that the probate statute should not apply until the appeals probate is heard.

A hearing has been set for October 21.

Judge may rule on Peterson life insurance
By SUSAN HERENDEENBEE STAFF WRITER
Last Updated: September 27, 2005, 05:48:45 AM PDT

Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Roger Beauchesne could rule this morning on Sharon Rocha's claim to $250,000 from a life insurance policy on her daughter, Laci Peterson.
Or he might send the case Rocha brought against her former son-in-law, convicted murderer Scott Peterson, to trial. Under state law, people who kill their spouses give up their inheritance rights.

But Scott Peterson, who maintains his innocence, won't give up his claim to the money until an appeal of his death sentence and guilty verdict is complete.
In legal papers, attorney Nareg Gourjian of Los Angeles, who represents Scott Peterson, said Rocha's claim is premature. He said the conviction alone does not establish Scott Peterson's guilt.

Attorney Adam Stewart of Modesto, who represents Rocha, said his client wants a ruling now, because an appeal to the California Supreme Court could take decades.

"If we are ultimately wrong in allowing the estate to recover the life insurance benefits, Mr. Peterson may, in 25 years from now, file suit for restitution against the estate," Stewart said in legal papers. "This is a risk the estate is willing to take