DocketNumber: Appeal No. 1
Filed Date: 7/14/1992
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/31/2024
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant bore the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he lacked criminal responsibility by reason of mental disease or defect (see, Penal Law § 40.15; People v Kohl, 72 NY2d 191). In rejecting the affirmative defense, the jury was entitled to rely on the presumption of sanity (see, People v Kohl, supra, at 199) and on the evidence of defendant’s rational and deliberate conduct (see, People v Moss, 179 AD2d 271).
The court did not abuse its discretion in imposing consecu