## Facts

- Coleman C. Smith killed his wife, Vera I. Smith, by strangulation on July 29, 1992.
- Shortly after the killing, Coleman called 911 and reported what he had done; police found him alone with Vera’s body, took him into custody, and arranged a mental-health evaluation within about half an hour.
- Coleman was charged with second-degree murder but was adjudicated not guilty by reason of insanity without a criminal trial.
- In a probate proceeding, Vera’s estate sought a determination that Coleman was disqualified from inheriting because he “unlawfully and intentionally” killed Vera under Florida’s slayer statute, § 732.802 (1991).
- At the probate evidentiary hearing, a police officer testified Coleman made statements indicating he remembered choking Vera to death; the 911 recording was admitted.
- Psychiatric experts testified unanimously that Coleman was probably legally insane at the time of the killing.
- The probate court found Coleman disqualified under § 732.802, and Coleman’s guardian appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether § 732.802 requires a criminal conviction or completion of a criminal trial before a probate court may disqualify a beneficiary.
2. Whether a criminal adjudication of not guilty by reason of insanity makes the slayer statute inapplicable as a matter of law.
3. Whether the evidence supported the probate court’s finding that Coleman “unlawfully and intentionally” killed Vera, rather than causing death by “legal accident.”

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the probate court’s judgment disqualifying Coleman as a beneficiary of Vera’s estate.
- The court held that a probate court may apply § 732.802 based on evidence presented in the civil proceeding, without a criminal conviction or completed criminal trial.
- The court held that a criminal insanity adjudication does not automatically preclude a civil finding that the killing was “unlawful and intentional” for purposes of § 732.802.
- The court concluded the probate court had sufficient evidence—Coleman’s statements, the 911 recording, and surrounding circumstances—to find an unlawful, intentional killing and to reject characterizing the death as accidental.

## Legal Principles

- Florida’s slayer statute, § 732.802, bars a person who “unlawfully and intentionally” kills the decedent from receiving probate benefits.
- Application of § 732.802 does not depend on a prior criminal conviction; a probate court may make an independent civil determination based on the evidence before it.
- A criminal verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity does not, by itself, control whether the killing was “unlawful and intentional” in a civil probate disqualification proceeding.
- In probate slayer-statute litigation, the trier of fact may weigh expert insanity testimony against other evidence of the defendant’s conduct and statements in determining intent.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed disinheritance under Florida’s slayer statute, holding that the probate court could independently determine—despite an insanity acquittal and without a completed criminal trial—that the spouse unlawfully and intentionally killed the decedent based on the civil evidentiary record.


Congleton v. Sansom, 664 So. 2d 276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1995)