A person can have another declared dead after 5 years, under certain legal provisions in Ohio. So the 3 added is the 8 SOL actually.
2121.08 Administering estate when decree vacated.
(A) The probate court may at any time within a three-year period from the date of the decree establishing the death of a presumed decedent, upon proof satisfactory to the court that the presumed decedent is in fact alive, vacate the decree establishing the presumption of death. After the decree has been vacated all the powers of the executor or administrator of the presumed decedent cease, but all proceedings had and steps taken with respect to the administration of the estate of the presumed decedent prior to the vacating of the decree remain valid. The executor or administrator of the estate of the presumed decedent who is found to be alive shall settle the account of the executor’s or administrator’s administration down to the time of the vacating of the decree and shall transfer all assets remaining in the possession or under the control of the executor or administrator to the person for whom the executor or administrator is acting, or to that person’s authorized agent or attorney.
As with any SOL, it sometimes mirrors what another state already passed or they need to set an SOL at some point in time, why not 3?
I was wondering the exact same thing. Is there any case law as to how judicial declarations of death that are clearly wrong from a practical, factual point of view are handled in prosecutions under criminal law? E.g. can a court rule that a person is alive for the purpose of criminal laws against murder, theft, and aggravated second degree mopery but dead for the purpose of family law (can’t get married), Social Security (no check for you), licenses and permits (no driving for you, no professional licenses, no credits or degrees from State universities), etc.?
Judge: “You just mowed down a dozen Girl Scouts with that car. Since you are dead, I cannot suspend your driver’s license or give you “bad driver” demerit points because those are civil proceedings, but I can sentence you to prison for manslaughter and reckless driving. Keep in mind you won’t be eligible for privileges in prison because only living prisoners get them. Dead men get no parole, no early release, no vocational training, no therapy, no canteen access (you’re dead!), it’ll be a bad life. Good luck.”
I think that basically, as others said, the legal processes that happened when he was declared dead do not have to be unravelled. The court delcared he was legally dead a long time ago. That ruliing stands. No need to give back death benefits, to return estate property, etc.
What happens to him Social-security-wise, I guess depends on SS rules. I am amazed that he did not impact on their radar either for that long. Either he worked using a different number (and now can collect on that number’s benefits) or he worked without SS contributions after he disappeared, hence no further SS benefits.
Even if they give him credit for his early years, what are about 10 or 15 years of contributions going to get you 27 years later? Plus he is partly the architect of his own misfortune by failing to contact anyone earlier to straighten this out. Maybe they could hold the cost of inappropriately paid benefits against him.
Basically, you pop up almost 30 years after you disappeared and expect everyone to reverse every transaction taken due to your misadventures - ain’t gonna happen. At a certain point every transaction has to be final. Maybe if you were stranded on a desert island until the final epsiode, you’d have an excuse.
It seems analogous to “squatter’s rights”. In many jurisdictions, a person who enjoys unhindered use of property without object from the owner after 20 years can claim title.
Doesn’t stop you from being charged with crimes - just from undoing the death settlements.
IANAL, I would think if the basic contention of a criminal conviction is proved wrong by self-evident facts, the person can demand exoneration. “You convicted me of killing Fred, now Fred just walked into the church for his memorial service.” This would be not much different, just a bit more dramatic, than “you convicted me of rape 20 years ago, and the semen DNA retested recently does not match.”
Of course, the usual reaction to the latter case in some juridictions is to try and pass laws disallowing retesting to avoid embarrassing the system… Kind of difficult to do for some “corpse” dancing around and yapping on the nightly news.
When new exculpatory evidence pops up, the defendant IIRC can petition for a new trial. The prosecution may opt to try him again, or if their case has fallen apart, they don’t contest the situation and the trial automatically results in a Not Guilty verdict.
Looks to me like the issue is related to financial situations.
Suppose he had an inheritance. Then he shows up a decade later, his will was executed, his heirs have spent the money and sold the property and generally moved on with their lives. Now he wants to be reinstated and get his property back. Oops.
In this situation, it would require repayment of SS benefits that his family accrued.
I wonder to what extent the fact that his disappearance was voluntary plays into the decision? This guy dropped out of society, apparently in part to avoid paying child support. I don’t have a problem with saying to that guy, “You made your choices twenty years ago, now you have to live with them,” but someone who was, say, lost at sea? Or one of these people who get kidnapped and held for years. Imagine if Joseph Fritzl had faked his wife’s death, and locked her in that basement dungeon of his for thirty years. Does the judge have any sort of discretion about cases like that, or is that statute of limitations unavoidable?