State v. Alan M. Johnson, 961 N.W.2d 18

Background

Defendant Alan M. Johnson broke into his brother‑in‑law K.M.’s home around midnight to search for suspected child pornography; he brought a gun and searched K.M.’s computer for over two hours.
K.M. discovered Johnson, closed the door, then—according to Johnson—reopened the door and lunged at him; Johnson shot K.M. five times, and K.M. died. Johnson later confessed and was charged with homicide and related counts.
At trial Johnson testified (his testimony was the only narrative of events). The circuit court gave imperfect self‑defense and first‑ and second‑degree intentional homicide and first‑degree reckless homicide instructions, but refused perfect self‑defense and second‑degree reckless‑homicide instructions.
The circuit court excluded evidence of the specific images Johnson claimed to have found on K.M.’s computer as unduly prejudicial and not sufficiently relevant; Johnson was allowed to say he went to search for and believed he found child pornography, but not the detailed contents.
A jury convicted Johnson of first‑degree reckless homicide; the court of appeals reversed, finding the trial court erred by refusing the perfect self‑defense and second‑degree reckless‑homicide instructions and by excluding the computer‑content evidence.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals as to jury instructions (ordered a new trial) but reversed the court of appeals as to the excluded other‑acts evidence, holding the exclusion was a permissible exercise of discretion.

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Johnson's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by refusing a perfect self‑defense instruction	No—evidence did not meet objective standard for a reasonable belief that deadly force was necessary	Yes—testimony (lunging, prior abuse, being trapped) met the low evidentiary threshold for an instruction	Reversed trial court: instruction should have been given (some evidence supported perfect self‑defense)
Whether the trial court erred by refusing a second‑degree reckless‑homicide instruction (lesser included)	No—facts showed "utter disregard for human life," so no reasonable basis for conviction only of second‑degree	Yes—evidence of fear, motive, and K.M. as aggressor supported a reasonable basis for second‑degree verdict	Reversed trial court: instruction should have been given (evidence could support second‑degree)
Whether the trial court erred by excluding evidence about the specific images found on K.M.’s computer	Admission would be more prejudicial than probative; risk of distraction and mini‑trial on child‑pornography issue	Excluding specifics prevented presentation of a core theory of defense (motive, provocation, fear)	Affirmed trial court: exclusion was reasonable under Wis. Stat. § 904.03 (probative value substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice)

Key Cases Cited

State v. Stietz, 375 Wis. 2d 572 (2017) (self‑defense instruction standard: low evidentiary bar; view evidence favorably to defendant)
State v. Head, 255 Wis. 2d 194 (2002) (elements and interpretation of perfect self‑defense statute)
State v. Jensen, 236 Wis. 2d 521 (2000) (definition and objective measurement of "utter disregard for human life")
State v. Weso, 60 Wis. 2d 404 (1973) (lesser‑included offense principles; discussion of depraved‑mind/utter‑disregard concepts)
State v. Burris, 333 Wis. 2d 87 (2011) (consider totality of circumstances in assessing utter disregard)
State v. Sullivan, 216 Wis. 2d 768 (1998) (framework for admissibility of other‑acts evidence)
Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184 (1957) (double jeopardy principle regarding conviction on lesser‑included offense)