State v. Larry L. Jackson, 983 N.W.2d 608

In 2015 Richard King was shot and killed in Milwaukee; Larry Jackson was charged with first-degree intentional homicide and being a felon in possession of a firearm.
Ballistics linked a .40-caliber pistol recovered from Joe Brown to the shooting; Brown testified he lent the gun to Jackson and that Jackson later returned it and confessed involvement.
Jackson's trial defense was an alibi: his mother, Carol, testified Jackson stayed at her house that evening; Jackson later alleged trial counsel did not contact two other alibi witnesses (ex-girlfriend JaNikka Marsh and sister Crystal Jackson).
After conviction, Jackson filed a postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for (1) failing to investigate/call Marsh and Crystal, (2) failing to interview or prepare his mother, and (3) advising him the court would require him to testify first; the circuit court denied the motion without a Machner hearing and the court of appeals affirmed.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding Jackson is entitled to a Machner hearing on the alibi‑witness claim but not on the other two claims; the case was remanded for that hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate or call two alibi witnesses (Marsh, Crystal)	State: witnesses had credibility problems/inconsistencies and evidence was overwhelming, so no prejudice	Jackson: counsel knew names but did not contact them; their affidavits place him at his mother’s house and would corroborate the alibi	Court: Jackson alleged sufficient non‑conclusory facts and the record does not conclusively refute prejudice; Machner hearing required
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to interview/prepare Jackson’s mother (Carol)	State: allegations are conclusory and lack specifics about what preparation was needed or how outcome would differ	Jackson: counsel did not interview or prepare Carol for detectives or trial, affecting her statements/testimony	Court: allegations were conclusory and insufficient to warrant a Machner hearing; claim denied
Whether counsel was ineffective for advising Jackson the court would require him to testify first	State: counsel’s statement was not shown to be incorrect or unreasonable; Brooks does not bar reasonable court control over witness order	Jackson: counsel told him the court would require him to testify first, deterring him from his preferred order and impacting trial strategy	Court: counsel’s statement may have been reasonable (trial courts have latitude under Geders/Brooks); allegation fails to show deficient performance, so no Machner hearing

State v. Ruffin, 401 Wis. 2d 619, 974 N.W.2d 432 (clarifies standards for Machner‑hearing threshold)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two‑prong ineffective assistance test: deficient performance and prejudice)
State v. Machner, 92 Wis. 2d 797, 285 N.W.2d 905 (Machner hearing described)
State v. Allen, 274 Wis. 2d 568, 682 N.W.2d 433 (postconviction pleading requirements and when hearing required)
State v. Balliette, 336 Wis. 2d 358, 805 N.W.2d 334 (conclusory motion standard for ineffective assistance claims)
Brooks v. Tennessee, 406 U.S. 605 (statute requiring defendant to testify first is unconstitutional; discussed in witness‑order context)
Geders v. United States, 425 U.S. 80 (trial court’s authority to manage order of proof)
State v. Jenkins, 355 Wis. 2d 180, 848 N.W.2d 786 (failure to call corroborating witnesses can be deficient performance)