was talking on the telephone. The note and the evidence indicate that Hohenwald then ran upstairs, forced open the upstairs bedroom door, and stabbed Lois repeatedly. Hohenwald then returned to the basement and continued his attack on Larry, eventually retrieving the wooden-handled knife after damaging the black-handled knife. When Hohenwald finally left the Steenerson residence, he was concerned only with escaping, as evidenced by the fact he told J.S., “let’s go,” when he reached the car. These reasonable inferences indicate that Hohenwald engaged in calculated decision-making fueled by anger, not terror. 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>). Thus, the circumstances proved support
holding that petitioner could not collaterally attack his state court conviction on a petition for review of an agency decision holding that victim of a minor or partial breach must continue own performance but victim of a material or total breach is excused from further performance holding the harmed victim need not be the victim of the offense of conviction holding that a defendants decision to chase the victim and continue his attack indicates hate instead of terror holding defendants phone call to his exwife announcing his intent to kill the victim was not an unrelated act of misconduct and permissible to rebut defendants testimony that he did not threaten the murder victim