From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ludwigsen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 5, 2008
48 A.D.3d 484 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2005-01462.

February 5, 2008.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.), rendered January 19, 2005, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jonathan M. Kratter of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Shulamit Rosenblum, and Flora Tartakovsky of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Fisher, J.P., Lifson, Covello and McCarthy, JJ.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the jury's rejection of his extreme emotional disturbance defense was against the weight of the evidence is without merit ( see Penal Law § 125.25 [a]; People v Azaz, 41 AD3d 610). Even had the jury found that the defendant was acting under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance at the time of the murder, it was entitled to reject his proffered excuse for this emotional state as unreasonable and not warranting mitigation ( see People v Yong Ho Han, 200 AD2d 780).

The defendant's remaining contentions, raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Ludwigsen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 5, 2008
48 A.D.3d 484 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

People v. Ludwigsen

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LEONARD LUDWIGSEN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 5, 2008

Citations

48 A.D.3d 484 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1173
849 N.Y.S.2d 793

Citing Cases

People v. Sepe

Whether the defendant's explanation or excuse was objectively reasonable must be determined by viewing it…

People v. Sinclair

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.The jury's determination that the defendant failed to prove by a…