People v. Mischley

I respectfully dissent. The disposition of the second issue is difficult because the impact a Bible quotation may have had on the jurors in this case cannot be ascertained. In People v Rohn, 98 Mich App 593, 597-598; 296 NW2d 315 (1980), lv den 410 Mich 876 (1980), this Court concluded that error requiring reversal occurred in closing argument when the prosecutor appealed to the jury’s religious duties in calling for defendant’s convictions. Similarly, People v Sutherland, 149 Mich App 161; 385 NW2d 637 (1985), disapproved of the prosecutor’s *484mention of the Ten Commandments during closing…