PEOPLE v. BUCKNER (2005)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.), rendered December 4, 2003, convicting him of murder in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's request for a jury charge on the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance (see Penal Law § 125.25[1][a] ).   The defendant presented no psychiatric evidence, claimed that he was innocent, and submitted no evidence indicating that he was suffering from emotional distress (see People v. Smith, 1 N.Y.3d 610, 612, 776 N.Y.S.2d 198, 808 N.E.2d 333;  People v. Roche, 98 N.Y.2d 70, 76, 745 N.Y.S.2d 775, 772 N.E.2d 1133;  People v. White, 79 N.Y.2d 900, 581 N.Y.S.2d 651, 590 N.E.2d 236;  People v. Harris, 109 A.D.2d 351, 362, 491 N.Y.S.2d 678).   Even when viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, the evidence merely established that the defendant was angry or upset, but not that he had lost self-control (see People v. Walker, 64 N.Y.2d 741, 743, 485 N.Y.S.2d 978, 475 N.E.2d 445;  People v. McDonald, 199 A.D.2d 420, 605 N.Y.S.2d 341).   Thus, any finding by the jury about the defendant's state of mind at the time of the killings would have been pure speculation (see People v. Roche, supra at 76, 745 N.Y.S.2d 775, 772 N.E.2d 1133).