Wilking decided to hold the February hearing after reviewing how implementation of such laws has been handled in other states and likewise determined that the hearing should require prosecutors show probable cause that John was not justified by law in his use of force. The judge ruled the new law required her to presume that Willow, who ran into John’s house before John shot him, intended to break the law forcefully, and to presume John had a reasonable and honest belief that he had to use deadly force. She ruled prosecutors did not overcome those presumptions in the hearing, and John was therefore immune from prosecution.

In the state’s March filing, attorneys argued John agreed to fight Willow, goaded him into a confrontation and prepared for that confrontation. The state also noted that John continued firing at Willow after he was already incapacitated.

The attorneys states the law exempting a person from a duty to retreat does not apply to John because it requires he not be involved in illegal activity or be the aggressor in the altercation.

In an early-April response, Cotton said a police detective lied and prosecutors misconstrued facts in an attempt to convict John. He said prosecutors attempted to dodge the new law in the case.