On Thursday, Feb. 20, 2025, the Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed the capital murder conviction of Carlos Roncali and ordered a new trial in the case involving the death of his wife, Marian Chaney Roncali. The panel held that the trial court erred by allowing forensic pathologist Dr. Mark LeVaughn to testify that Marian’s death was a homicide based largely on unverified law enforcement information. In its opinion, the court stated, “Based on our review, the trial court abused its discretion in allowing testimony that was not supported by the necessary foundational facts.”
Roncali had been convicted by a Newton County circuit court and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. On appeal, he argued that the evidence did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that he was responsible for his wife’s death. While the judges acknowledged that sufficient evidence existed to support a conviction, they found that admitting Dr. LeVaughn’s testimony violated Mississippi’s evidentiary rules.
The panel’s decision was split 4‑4‑2. The four-judge majority—Judges John H. Emfinger, Presiding Judge Jack L. Wilson, Judge David Neil McCarty, and Judge John D. Weddle—supported reversing the conviction. Four judges—Presiding Judge Virginia C. Carlton, Chief Judge Donna M. Barnes, Judge Anthony N. Lawrence III, and Judge Amy Lassitter St. Pe’—concurred in part but dissented in part, agreeing that the evidence might have supported a conviction while objecting to the admission of the disputed expert testimony. Two dissenting judges, Judge Latrice A. Westbrooks and Judge Deborah McDonald, argued that the deficiencies in the evidence—particularly the failure to prove that a murder occurred during a kidnapping—“warranted not just a remand but a complete reversal” of the conviction.
In an interview following the decision, District Attorney Steven Kilgore offered his candid reaction. “My first thought was, ‘Great, we get to try this one again,’ but then I read the opinion and noticed a split among the judges,” he said. “That changes things a little bit. Given that the Court of Appeals was so divided, we've already reached out to the AG's office to see if we can get it heard by the Supreme Court in the spring. In a matter like that, you have 10 judges listening to the same evidence and deciding one way for some and another way for others, and two deciding a whole different route. That's the type of case they will review, especially since it's a capital murder case.”
When asked whether he was confident that the Supreme Court would side with the appeals court, Kilgore replied, “Well, that's hard to say because they're going to agree with somebody, but the justices were so split that I think our position has merit. I think the minority position in the case that found we did need our burden and that Dr. LeVaughn could testify as he did was persuasive, and I believe that when the spring court hears it, they'll agree with our position.” He also addressed a question about the identity of the officer who provided key information about the methamphetamine administration: “To the best of my recollection, he didn't refuse to reveal it. He just couldn't think of the officer's name. I don't think he was being secret. I think he just couldn't remember—the head medical examiner doesn't have four counties like I do; he has 82.”
Although the appellate court recognized that sufficient evidence existed to support a conviction, the error in admitting Dr. LeVaughn’s testimony necessitated a reversal and remand for a new trial. With the case now headed to the Mississippi Supreme Court or back to the Newton County circuit court, both sides will have another opportunity to present their evidence under these clarified standards.
