Also known as: sudden heat of passion · heat of passion · sudden passion
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The state of sudden and intense emotional agitation arising from adequate provocation that negates the malice required for murder. This state must be such that an ordinary person would lose self-control, the defendant must have actually experienced it, and the killing must occur before a reasonable cooling-off period has elapsed.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Serena Soto learned that her coworker had removed her name from patent documents during a tense office meeting. After the coworker punched Serena's brother in the face and reached into a bag, Serena struck the coworker with a laptop stand. The sequence of events occurred without a break long enough for an ordinary person to regain composure, so the killing occurred in sudden heat and passion.
Stephen Shaw entered a testing room and found his spouse engaged in a sexual encounter with a colleague. Enraged by the sight, Stephen seized a torque wrench and killed the colleague at once. Because the discovery of spousal adultery constitutes classic adequate provocation and no cooling interval elapsed, the killing took place in sudden heat and passion.
Stella Shapiro arrived at a prearranged office meeting carrying a concealed fireplace poker. When the managing partner grabbed her collar, shook her, and slapped her face, Stella immediately struck back with the poker. The battery supplied adequate provocation and the response followed without time for cooling, placing the act in sudden heat and passion.
Solomon Silver discovered his spouse with another person after closing time at a clothing store. He completed duties at a second location, drove home, received text messages, searched for the other person's location, and later stabbed her in a parking lot. The extended interval allowed an ordinary person to cool, so the killing did not occur in sudden heat and passion.
Santiago Sanchez invited his coworker to a remote unguarded platform after dark, knowing the hazards. During an argument the coworker repeated past criticisms, and Sanchez shoved him off the platform. Advance selection of the deadly location demonstrated that malice had formed before any provocation, preventing reduction based on sudden heat and passion.
Sarah Sullivan locked a graduate student in a laboratory after a plagiarism accusation. After nearly an hour of argument she wrapped an extension cord around his neck and applied pressure for several minutes. Mere words supplied no adequate provocation, so the prolonged deliberate act occurred without sudden heat and passion.
The provocation must be adequate to arouse sudden intense passion in an ordinary person. The defendant must have actually experienced that passion. A reasonable person would not have had time to cool off, and the defendant in fact did not cool off before the killing.
Supporting sources
Yes. Common law long recognizes catching a spouse in adultery as classic adequate provocation sufficient to arouse sudden intense passion in an ordinary person. When the defendant acts immediately while still gripped by that passion, the killing is reduced to voluntary manslaughter.
…might invoke today: that Cobham's statements were self-inculpatory, 2 How. St. Tr., at 19, that they were not made in the heat of passion, id. , at 14, and that they were not "extracted from [him] upon any hopes or promise of Pardon," id. , at 29. It is not plausible that the Framers' only objection to the trial was that…
…upon an individual basis. Was the crime a crime against property only, or did it involve danger to human life? Was it a crime of sudden passion
…manslaughter, if they found beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant did the killing without malice or deliberation, but upon a sudden heat of passion
…murder is in the first degree if committed in cold blood, and is murder in the second degree if committed on impulse or in the sudden heat of passion
…deliberation must show that the determination to kill was reached calmly and “in cold blood” rather than under impulse or the heat of passion
Supporting sources
Yes. A serious battery inflicted on the defendant or a close relative qualifies as adequate provocation at common law. The battery on the brother in the office confrontation supplied recognized provocation that revived the heat of passion when followed immediately by further threatening conduct.
Supporting sources
Yes. When the defendant completes other tasks, drives home, receives messages, and then locates the victim hours later, an ordinary person would have regained self-control. The extended interval means the killing occurred after cooling and remains murder.
Supporting sources
No. Mere words, trivial battery, and past wrongs are legally inadequate provocation under common law. Only serious battery, threats of deadly force, or discovery of spousal adultery traditionally qualify to reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter.
Supporting sources