Steven Dixon was recently found guilty of driving under the influence with a prior felony conviction following a two-day jury trial. This was Dixon’s third jury trial in Sixth Judicial District Court within seven months, which has left him with three felony convictions after pleading not guilty in each case.
In the most recent case, Dixon was arrested after a citizen called dispatch to report a vehicle that had hit a parked vehicle and later got stuck on a bush. The individual, later identified to be Dixon, reportedly exited the vehicle and started walking.
When Dixon was stopped on foot and questioned by law enforcement officers, he reportedly said he had never seen the car in question before, even though the vehicle contained mail addressed to him and was registered to his mother. A blood draw was performed on Dixon to determine his blood alcohol level, and approximately two hours after the incident, his blood alcohol level was 0.216, 2.7 times the legal driving limit.
In order to find Dixon guilty of driving under the influence, the jury was instructed to return a guilty verdict if they unanimously agree without a reasonable doubt that Dixon was willfully driving or in control of a vehicle on a public roadway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or with a blood alcohol level of .08 or more in a blood or breath sample taken within two hours after driving and/or being in contact of said vehicle.
In the trial, there were some differing opinions of legal counsel as to whether blood was taken from Dixon within two hours, as the blood draw was reported to be almost right at the two-hour mark and the timestamps between reporting officials varied by minutes.
Alternate Public Defender Maureen McQuillan represented Dixon in the case in question. McQuillan pointed out to the jury that nobody, including the main witness actually saw her client in or driving the vehicle, calling into question whether there was reasonable doubt that it was, in fact, Dixon who was driving the vehicle. She also said that Dixon did admit to being intoxicated, but said that he was not driving the vehicle, hence his plea of not guilty.
“Seconds count when the state must prove the elements of a crime without a reasonable doubt,” said McQuillan.
Deputy District Attorney Max Stovall told the jury that Dixon should be convicted of the crime and that circumstantial evidence provided enough to place Dixon as the driver of the vehicle the night he was found to be intoxicated, just down the street from the car that was stuck and had hit another vehicle.
“He crashed into a car and then into a bush,” said Stovall. “That’s not a sober person driving, that’s a drunk person driving,” said Stovall.
At the end of the day, the jury returned a verdict that Dixon was guilty of driving under the influence with a prior felony conviction, constituting a category B felony. The case was set for sentencing on April 23 during a 9:30 stacked law and motion hearing day.
