context: These reasonable inferences indicate that Hohenwald engaged in calculated decision-making fueled by anger, not terror.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 759 N.W.2d 40, 40
citation_a.parenthetical: stating that anger alone is insufficient to form the basis for heat-of-passion manslaughter
citation_a.sentence: See Van Keuren, 759 N.W.2d at 40 (stating that anger alone is insufficient to form the basis for heat-of-passion manslaughter); State v. Richardson, 398 N.W.2d 657, 664 (Minn.1986) (holding that a defendant’s decision to chase the victim and continue his attack “indicates hate instead of terror”). Thus, the circumstances proved support reasonable inferences that establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Hohenwald’s reason and willpower were neither clouded nor weakened at the time of the killings.
citation_b.signal: cf.
citation_b.identifier: 624 N.W.2d 585, 591
citation_b.parenthetical: concluding that the defendant did not act in the heat of passion when he made "rational" and "calculating" attempts to avoid detection for the crime he had just committed
citation_b.sentence: Cf. State v. Stewart, 624 N.W.2d 585, 591 (Minn.2001) (concluding that the defendant did not act in the heat of passion when he made “rational” and “calculating” attempts to avoid detection for the crime he had just committed).