State of Connecticut v. Gary D. Gibson

Summary

The court held that the prosecutor's two uses of “I think” during closing argument were permissible arguments based on the evidence and reasonable inferences, rather than expressions of personal opinion or unsworn testimony. Because no prosecutorial impropriety occurred, the defendant was not deprived of due process, and the court reversed the intermediate appellate court's reversal of the conviction. The court nevertheless stated that prosecutors should preferably avoid using that phrase in this context.