It was misconduct for the prosecutor to sit in the witness stand during closing argument and speak as if he were the victim describing the night of his murder. The prosecutor inappropriately focused on exacting revenge on behalf of the victim, and inflamed the jury. However, the misconduct did not violate petitioner’s due process rights because the prosecutor’s soliloquy did not infect the trial with unfairness or render it fundamentally unfair. The jury was properly instructed that argument was not evidence, and the evidence of a premeditated strangling was strong.