Opinion
June 2, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Beldock, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court's jury charge improperly limited the application of his justification defense to those circumstances in which the use of deadly force would be justified. This contention is unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant neither requested such instruction at the charge conference nor objected on this ground to the charge as given (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Buckley, 75 N.Y.2d 843, 846-847; People v. Samuels, 198 A.D.2d 384; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, this contention lacks merit. Under the circumstances presented herein, no reasonable view of the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant (see, People v. Torre, 42 N.Y.2d 1036, 1037), supports a finding that the defendant used merely ordinary physical force, as opposed to deadly physical force, in stabbing the complainant in the back (see, People v. Samuels, supra).
Copertino, J.P., Thompson, Santucci and Friedmann, JJ., concur.