State v. Sullivan

Summary

The court held that the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument was improper because it used inflammatory language, misstated the defendant’s actual theory, distorted the state’s burden of proof, and introduced defense theories unrelated to the evidence. The remarks did not, however, shift the burden of proof to the defendant, and the improprieties did not deprive him of a fair trial under the applicable prejudice factors. The court therefore affirmed the Appellate Court’s judgment.