PEOPLE v. DiLEONARDO (2006)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), rendered May 18, 2004, convicting him of murder in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Moreover, the Supreme Court's determination that the defendant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was acting “under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there was a reasonable explanation or excuse” when he stabbed and killed the victim was not against the weight of the evidence (Penal Law § 125.25[1][a];  see Penal Law § 125.20[2];  People v. Roche, 98 N.Y.2d 70, 745 N.Y.S.2d 775, 772 N.E.2d 1133;  People v. Chambers, 18 A.D.3d 571, 795 N.Y.S.2d 307;  People v. George, 7 A.D.3d 810, 776 N.Y.S.2d 883).   The court reasonably concluded that the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime were not indicative of a loss of self-control or similar mental infirmity (see People v. Roche, supra;  People v. Palacios, 302 A.D.2d 540, 755 N.Y.S.2d 268).   Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly rejected the defendant's affirmative defense.