Investigators say medical findings, evidence inside the couple’s home and a later interview contradicted the husband’s first explanation.

CEDAR HILL, Mo. — A Missouri man is facing two felony charges after investigators said his initial claim that his wife had fallen inside their home gave way to evidence that she had been shot from behind and to an alleged admission that he fired the shot.

Cody A. Chilcutt, 32, of Cedar Hill, was charged with first-degree domestic assault and armed criminal action after the Aug. 14 shooting, according to the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office and court information cited in local reports. His wife survived and was taken to an area hospital. Sheriff’s Office spokesman Grant Bissell told Leader Publications that she was in stable condition on Aug. 15. Authorities have not publicly identified her, and the reports reviewed for this story did not disclose a motive for the shooting.

The investigation appears to have changed direction after the woman reached the hospital. Bissell said investigators believe the shooting occurred at about 7 a.m. and that someone called 911 at roughly 7:40 a.m. to report that a person had been hurt in a fall. The Sheriff’s Office was contacted later, at about 9:45 a.m., after medical personnel examined the woman, according to Leader Publications. The hospital findings became an important part of a case that investigators say began with an explanation suggesting an accidental injury rather than gunfire.

Medical personnel determined that the woman had an injury consistent with being shot from behind in the head and neck area, according to the probable-cause information described by Law&Crime and Leader Publications. That assessment did not match the account investigators say Chilcutt initially gave. The woman, meanwhile, was able to give authorities her own description of what she remembered. She said she and her husband had been walking out of their bedroom when she suddenly experienced intense pain in the back of her head and collapsed.

Chilcutt initially told investigators that he had been walking behind his wife when he heard a loud sound and then saw her fall and strike her head, according to the probable-cause statement. Investigators did not accept the apparent fall as a complete explanation. Detectives searched the home and found evidence they believed showed that a shot had been fired from inside the residence. Bissell did not publicly describe the specific evidence recovered or explain how investigators determined where the shot originated.

That finding put the focus on Chilcutt, who had placed himself immediately behind his wife at the time she collapsed. Investigators questioned him again after advising him of his Miranda rights. According to the probable-cause affidavit cited by Law&Crime, Chilcutt then admitted that he had shot his wife while standing behind her. The available public reports do not describe what else he told detectives during that interview, whether he offered an explanation for the shooting or whether investigators recovered a firearm linked to the injury.

The alleged change in Chilcutt’s account is central to the prosecution’s early description of the case. Prosecutors went beyond alleging that a gun was fired during a sudden domestic incident. In a filing seeking to keep Chilcutt jailed without bond, they said evidence indicated that the shooting had been planned and that Chilcutt intended for his wife to die from her injuries. Those are prosecution allegations at this stage of the case and have not been established by a conviction.

Prosecutors also cited what they described as Chilcutt’s conduct after the shooting. The bond filing alleged that he shot his wife from behind and then called 911 to report that she had fallen. Prosecutors relied on the circumstances of the alleged attack and his subsequent account in arguing that he presented a danger to his wife and the community as well as a flight risk. A judge initially ordered him held without bond, according to the court information available when the case was first reported.

The first-degree domestic assault charge is significant under Missouri law because the offense covers an attempt to kill a domestic victim or knowingly causing or attempting to cause serious physical injury to that person. State law classifies first-degree domestic assault as a Class B felony, but it becomes a Class A felony when serious physical injury is inflicted. Public reports reviewed for this story identify the charge but do not clearly state which felony classification prosecutors are applying in Chilcutt’s case.

Armed criminal action is a separate Missouri offense tied to committing a felony through the use or assistance of a dangerous instrument or deadly weapon. The statute provides for an additional prison term upon conviction, generally beginning at three years for the offense under the current law, with different provisions applying in some circumstances. Any potential sentence would depend on the charges ultimately pursued, the facts established in court, Chilcutt’s criminal history if relevant and the outcome of the case.

The timing supplied by local authorities also adds detail that was not apparent from the earliest summaries of the arrest. Investigators believe the shooting occurred near 7 a.m., while the emergency call reporting a fall came about 40 minutes later. The Sheriff’s Office did not become involved until after the hospital examination, according to Bissell’s account. Publicly available reporting does not explain what occurred during the period between the shooting and the 911 call or how the woman was taken from the home for treatment.

The victim’s survival gave detectives an account from the person who was injured, but her statement did not identify a shooter because she described feeling sudden pain from behind before collapsing. Instead, investigators appear to have relied on several pieces of information together: her position and recollection, the medical assessment, Chilcutt’s initial statement that he was behind her, evidence inside the residence and what authorities say was his later admission. The publicly available probable-cause summary does not identify whether forensic testing has been completed or what additional evidence prosecutors may present if the case proceeds toward trial.

The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office announced after the incident that Chilcutt had been arrested and charged following the investigation at the 8500 block of Lake Drive in Cedar Hill. The agency said the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office assisted with the case. The woman was transported to an area hospital, while Chilcutt was taken into custody. No additional public information reviewed for this story provided an updated medical condition beyond the report that she was stable the day after the shooting.

Early court records cited by Law&Crime listed a bond review hearing for Aug. 25. The public sources reviewed for this update did not provide a verified account of the outcome of that hearing or establish a later disposition of the charges. Chilcutt is accused, not convicted, and the allegations against him remain subject to the court process. Authorities also have not publicly disclosed a motive or further explained the evidence they say supports the prosecution’s allegation of planning.

Author note: Last updated Sept. 28, 2026.