Kansas City, Mo ? A confession thrown out by a lower court can be used against a man accused of killing his Navy shipmate, a federal appellate court ruled.

The ruling came Friday from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the ruling of one of its own panels. Seven of the 11 judges concluded that Michael Edward LeBrun, 58, of Greenwood, understood his rights during interrogation by Navy Criminal Investigative Service officers.

LeBrun is charged with killing Ensign Andrew Muns in 1968, while their ship, the Navy fueling vessel USS Cacapon, was anchored in the Philippines.

Muns disappeared at the same time that $8,600 was found missing from the ship’s disbursement office. Investigators at the time concluded that Muns, then a 24-year-old payroll officer, had stolen the money and deserted.

At the urging of Muns’ sister, the case was reopened 30 years later. The investigation eventually led to LeBrun.

When questioned by Navy investigators in September 2000, LeBrun was told he was not under arrest, and officers asked him to give a voluntary statement. They chose not to advise him of his Miranda rights.

Court records show that investigators promised LeBrun that he would not be prosecuted if he confessed to manslaughter, because the statute of limitations on that charge had run out.

LeBrun then told officers in a videotaped confession that he had stolen the money, and when Muns discovered what he was doing, LeBrun strangled him and bashed his head against the ship’s deck. LeBrun said he disposed of the money and the body in a tank of caustic fuel oil.

He was charged with murder in 2001. Muns’ body has never been recovered.

In October 2002, a three-judge panel of the 8th Circuit upheld a district judge’s ruling that the confession was illegally obtained through coercion and that LeBrun’s Miranda rights had been violated. The court decided in January 2003 to rehear the case.

Friday’s decision cited LeBrun’s status as a middle-aged businessman who had attended law school, and who had testified that he understood his rights during the interrogation.

Judge Morris Sheppard Arnold wrote a dissenting opinion in Friday’s ruling. Arnold said the investigators made threats designed to force a confession, including threatening financial ruin and preying on LeBrun’s fears about his health.

LeBrun’s lawyer, Glenn Bradford, said he planned to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.