Opinion
April 27, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Owens, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We find unpersuasive the defendant's contention that the trial court erroneously denied his request to charge the crime of manslaughter in the second degree as a lesser included offense of murder in the second degree. In order for such a charge to be submitted to the jury, there must be a reasonable view of the evidence which would support a conviction of the defendant for the lesser crime and not the greater (see, CPL 300.50; People v Glover, 57 N.Y.2d 61; People v Green, 56 N.Y.2d 427, rearg denied 57 N.Y.2d 775). We conclude, as did the trial court, that the eyewitness accounts of the killing and the extensive medical testimony in this case negate any reasonable possibility that the jury could have found the defendant guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and not guilty of one of the greater homicide offenses (see, e.g., People v Brensic, 119 A.D.2d 281, lv granted 69 N.Y.2d 719; People v Bova, 122 A.D.2d 798, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 810; People v Doctor, 98 A.D.2d 780).
We find similarly unavailing the defendant's contention that the court should have granted his motion for a mistrial based upon the photo identification of the defendant by an eyewitness at the crime scene (see, Matter of Michael J., 117 A.D.2d 602, 603; People v Williams, 87 A.D.2d 876; People v Tillman, 74 A.D.2d 911).
Additionally, we discern no error in the sentencing of the defendant, as the court was fully aware of his lengthy criminal history, his personal and social background, and the serious nature of the instant offenses (see, People v Pedraza, 66 N.Y.2d 626; People v Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302; People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit (see, People v Pobliner, 32 N.Y.2d 356, cert denied 416 U.S. 905). Lawrence, J.P., Weinstein, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.