Judge: Claims of unconstitutional sentence ‘without merit’

An appeal by Felix Vail to overturn his conviction in the second-degree murder of his wife, Mary Horton Vail, has been denied.

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal ruled on Thursday that Vail’s seven-point appeal was “without merit.”

Vail was convicted on Aug. 12, 2016, of killing his wife after jurors deliberated for less than an hour. 

Mary Horton Vail’s body was pulled from the Calcasieu River on Oct. 30, 1962. She was 22. 

Dr. Michael Baden, a forensic pathologist, testified she had been knocked unconscious and strangled with a scarf found around her neck. He said the 4 inches of the scarf in her mouth was enough to suffocate her.

Calcasieu Parish Coroner Dr. Terry Welke testified he did not believe Mary Vail died from drowning and that it was his opinion she was dead before she went into the water.

While Welke could not state what caused her death, he did testify he was 100 percent certain the manner of death was homicide.

In the appeal, Vail claimed the state failed to sufficiently prove his guilt because the evidence was entirely circumstantial; the trial court erred by offering evidence based on “the doctrine of chances”; the jury wasn’t properly instructed on the burden of proof; state witnesses weren’t forced to testify in person; evidence should have been suppressed because it was untimely; a 54-year delay violated his rights to a fair trial; and his life sentence was unconstitutional.

“The jury heard extensive testimony from three expert witnesses regarding whether Mary Horton Vail was dead before she entered the water or died after she entered the water,” Judge Elizabeth Pickett wrote in the ruling. “The experts also offered opinion testimony as to the event surrounding her deaths, based on the reports and evidence available to them as well as their opinions pertaining to the cause of death.

“After reviewing the experts’ testimony in their entirety, we do not find the expert witnesses’ opinions of the cause and manner of death to be patently unsound,” Pickett wrote.

The judge also noted that three of the state’s witnesses testified Vail admitted to each of them at different times that he had killed his wife.

“The testimony of three of the states’ witnesses … is not circumstantial in nature,” Pickett wrote. “We find these admissions by the defendant, taken together, are confessions and therefore are direct evidence that he committed the offense.”

As to Vail’s argument that evidence regarding the disappearances of Sharon Hensley and Annette Carver Vail — one a girlfriend of Vail’s and the other his second wife — shouldn’t have been admitted, the court said Vail did not make any new arguments that were not presented to the court already pretrial and found no palpable error in the ruling of the write panel.

The court also ruled the jury were given their instructions on the burden of proof required before they retired to deliberate and the defense raised “no objection” to the admission of two of the state’s witnesses whose testimony was presented via video-taped examination.

On Vail’s claim that evidence should have been suppressed in the case, the court ruled “the defendant had sufficient time to prepare an adequate and specific motion to suppress but failed to do so.”  

Vail claimed in his appeal that the 54-year delay from the time of Mary Vail’s death to his indictment was prejudicial and violated his due process right to a fair trial. The court disagreed.

“A review of the police investigation report fairly established that the defendant benefited from the passage of time in this case,” Pickett wrote. “All of the witnesses’ statements, many of whom reported that the defendant was abusive towards his wife and was capable of killing her, were lost, and seemingly all of the witnesses interviewed were either deceased or could not be located. Furthermore, the defendant failed to show how his mental or emotional health was affected by the pre-indictment delay in this case. The defendant’s allegations of prejudice are insufficient to support a due process violation based on pre-indictment delay.”

In his final assignment of error, Vail argued the trial court did not have authority to sentence him to life imprisonment. He said he should have received the maximum sentence for the lesser offense of manslaughter because in 1972 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that mandatory death penalties were unconstitutional. He argued the lesser charge for criminal homicide at the time was manslaughter, which at the time imposed a sentence of up to 21 years.

The court ruled, however, that Vail received a lesser sentence, life in prison at hard labor, in this case so his claim is “without merit.”

The appeals court did rule, however, that Vail wasn’t properly advised of the time limitation for filing an appeal application. The court also ruled that 14th Judicial District Court needs to correct its court minutes to reflect that Vail’s sentence is to be served at hard labor.

Felix Vail, 80, was convicted on Aug. 12, 2016, of killing his wife after jurors deliberated for less than an hour.

Rick Hickman