A recent Court of Appeals (here) dealt with the issue of whether the evidence was sufficient to establish premeditation and deliberation in a first-degree murder case (it was). Since that issue arises with some frequency, I’ll address it here. “Premeditation” means thinking about something beforehand, for some length of time, however short; “deliberation” refers to an intention to kill formed while defendant was in a “cool state of blood.” State v. Bullock, 326 N.C. 253 (1990); State v. Ruof, 296 N.C. 623 (1979); State v. Blue, 207 N.C. App. 267 (2010) (the defendant’s statement that he formed the intent to kill and contemplated whether he would be caught before he began the attack was sufficient evidence that he formed the intent to kill in a cool state of blood). A cool state of blood does not mean absence of passion and emotion; a person may be capable of forming murderous intent, premeditating and deliberating, yet be prompted and to a large extent controlled by passion at the time of the offense. State v. Vause, 328 N.C. 231 (1991). Rather, it means that a killing was committed with a fixed design to kill, regardless of whether the defendant was angry or gripped with passion at the time of the act. Bullock, 326 N.C. 253; Ruof, 296 N.C. 623. It also means that the defendant’s anger or emotion was not so strong as to overcome his or her reason. State v. Hunt, 330 N.C. 425 (1991). Premeditation and deliberation need not last for [...]
Faculty Coordinators
