State v. Mills
In State v. Mills, 57 Conn. App. 202, 207, 748 A.2d 318, cert. denied, 253 Conn. 914, 915, 754 A.2d 163 (2000), the Court concluded that "the prosecutor's repeated appeals to the jury that justice required a conviction coupled with the repeated vitriolic references to the defendant could reasonably have been a factor in the jury's decision to convict.
His opinion that society would be in trouble if the defendant were not convicted might also have played a part in the jury's decision to convict because of a fear that the defendant might strike again if acquitted." Id., at 208-209.
The prosecutor in Mills also argued: "It's murder, murder based on an unprovoked attack of a man sitting at a table, minding his business. If we allow this to happen, we are all in trouble. If--we could be in somebody's house and somebody--minding our business, somebody can come in and stab . . . ." State v. Mills, supra, 57 Conn. App. at 207 n.8.