Judge rules admission of injuring Sikeston infant can be used at trial

ST. LOUIS -- The Missouri Court of Appeals has determined a Sikeston, Mo., man's admission of injuring an infant so severely the child eventually died should be part of the case's evidence.

Judge Colleen Dolan issued her opinion Tuesday that Kevin Dixon's statement and videotaped demonstration of how he threw an 8-month-old boy against a wall should be part of the trial court evidence. Last May, Dixon's defense attorney had contended the admissions were improperly obtained by detectives.

Initially the trial judge agreed with the defense and ruled to suppress the confession and the video tape, prompting an appeal by Scott County Prosecutor Paul Boyd.

"The [appeals] court sided with me," Boyd said. "My officers had done nothing wrong."

Emergency personnel were called to a Sikeston residence on March 24, 2009, following a report of a child not breathing. It was determined the child had sustained three complex skull fractures, a fracture of his pubic bone, brain swelling and spinal cord swelling.

The child was taken to a St. Louis hospital, where he died several days later.

Dixon was initially interviewed by Sikeston Department of Public Safety officers on March 24, 2009. At that time Dixon said the infant quit breathing while he was giving the child formula.

On March 30, 2009, Dixon was again interviewed. At that time he said the child fell from a couch, later said the child fell from his arms, then offered a third explanation that he placed the child on the top of the refrigerator and the baby fell. Eventually, Dixon admitted to throwing the child against a wall.

In both instances officers noted Dixon was read his Miranda rights and signed a form waiving his rights.

Dolan pointed out in her opinion that at the time the detectives had sought information about how the child was injured, the child was still alive. The detectives explained to Dixon they were seeking the circumstances of the injuries in order to assist the doctors with their treatment.

She also pointed out that Dixon was aware that he would face murder charges should the child die and said so during the second interview.

"Upon looking at the totality of the circumstances, defendant's will was not overborne from a promise of leniency rendering his statements involuntary," she wrote in the opinion. In addition, she pointed out when Dixon eventually gave his statements in the interview with detectives he did so to prevent "the baby from dying so he would not be charged with murder not because of a promise of leniency."

According to Boyd, more motions on the case are scheduled to be heard in St. Louis on Jan. 7. He said at that time he will seek a date for a trial on first-degree murder and felony child abuse charges.