Depends on what Conrad Murray is convicted of. If of murder, I would think that some public perception might change for the better (perhaps in the form of pity, rather than true appreciation). If of manslaughter, I feel that it's unlikely that people would think better of Michael, as since I'm banking more on feelings of pity from the general public rather than appreciation, my guess is that they probably won't sympathise with someone, whom they perceive to be partly responsible of his own death and some other factors.
Don't expect much from the extremist haters or the close-minded ones either. People will believe whatever they want to believe, and these ones are the least likely to be "enlightened" by any manner of conviction of Murray.
Just a short disclaimer, I'm not personally saying that Michael was partly responsible for his own death and hence, deserves no sympathy from the public. I'm judging based on what the media has told the general public, and quite possibly, what the general public has concluded from the media's stories. Knowing that the general public would not delve in deeper for further information, thus, leaving the media as their one and only source, I feel it's unlikely that they will ever change whatever view they currently have, unless Murray is convicted of a crime that radically defies whatever the media has fed to them.
EDIT: Just to add a tiny bit more... Even if Murray is convicted of murder in the first degree, it's still difficult to say if the public's view would change for the better, as I doubt that many people were moved by the "not guilty" verdict from the 2005 trial.