State v. Johnson, 351 Conn. 53

Latroy Johnson was convicted of two counts of murder and one count of first-degree assault in connection with a 2017 shooting in Hartford, Connecticut.
Johnson admitted to the shootings but claimed he acted in self-defense and defense of others, particularly citing threats and the belief that victims were armed.
The jury rejected these defenses and found him guilty after reviewing testimony, physical evidence, and surveillance footage.
Johnson appealed, arguing insufficient evidence for the rejection of his justification defenses regarding the shooting of one victim (Wooten) and improper exclusion of evidence of another victim’s (Taylor’s) prior arson conviction to show propensity for violence.
The Connecticut Supreme Court reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence defeating self-defense and evaluated the trial court's evidentiary ruling regarding the excluded conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to defeat self-defense	Johnson was not justified in shooting Wooten	Wooten was an active shooter justifying response	Evidence was sufficient; Wooten was acting defensively
Exclusion of victim's prior arson conviction	Taylor's arson conviction irrelevant or inadmissible	Arson conviction showed Taylor's violent character	Exclusion, if error, was harmless and did not sway jury

State v. Bryan, 307 Conn. 823 (self-defense justification principles and burden of proof)
State v. Revels, 313 Conn. 762 (sufficiency of evidence and burden in justification defenses)
State v. Osimanti, 299 Conn. 1 (admissibility and harm analysis of victim's violent character evidence)
State v. Garrison, 203 Conn. 466 (duty to retreat in self-defense context)