Serving as Personal Representative after a Felony Conviction
Summary
Senate Bill 1606 amends Florida probate law governing who may serve as a personal representative of a decedent’s estate. Under current law, a person convicted of a felony is generally disqualified from serving. This bill creates a narrow exception for a convicted felon who is not currently incarcerated and who is the decedent’s parent, spouse, child, or grandchild, but only when there are no other family members of the same degree of consanguinity available to serve.
The bill also directs the court to evaluate a set of factors when a qualifying family member with a felony conviction petitions to serve as personal representative. Those factors include whether the decedent was the victim of the felony, whether the offense involved theft, fraud, or dishonesty, the nature and timing of the offense, the petitioner’s rehabilitation, restoration of civil rights, and the relationship between the petitioner and decedent. The court may consider these criteria in deciding whether to grant the petition, and the act takes effect July 1, 2026.
Impact
This bill would amend section 733.303, Florida Statutes, which lists persons not qualified to act as personal representatives in probate proceedings. It would soften the existing felony-based disqualification rule by allowing certain close relatives with felony convictions to be appointed in limited circumstances, thereby expanding the pool of eligible estate representatives and giving probate courts discretion to approve petitions based on individualized factors. The change would affect estate administration, family members seeking appointment, and courts applying probate qualification standards.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a targeted, family-centered exception rather than a broad rollback of disqualification rules. Its structure suggests an effort to balance rehabilitation and family ties against concerns about criminal history and fiduciary trust. No formal support or opposition is documented in the provided context, but the bill’s careful criteria indicate an intent to make the exception limited and case-specific.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be whether people with felony convictions should be trusted to administer estates and how broad the exception should be. Supporters would likely emphasize family continuity, rehabilitation, and the need to allow a close relative to serve when no similarly close family member is available. Opponents may focus on the risk of fraud, theft, or misuse of estate assets, especially where the felony involved dishonesty or where the decedent was the victim. The bill addresses these concerns by requiring courts to weigh the offense, rehabilitation, civil rights restoration, and objections from interested parties.