DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The jury 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 §§ 125.20; 125.25[1][a]; see People v. Roche, 98 N.Y.2d 70, 75; People v. Casassa, 49 N.Y.2d 668, 675, cert denied 449 U.S. 842; People v. Palacios, 302 A.D.2d 540, 541). 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. Walker 64 N.Y.2d 741, 743; People v. Palacios, supra; People v. Gonzalez, 249 A.D.2d 41; People v. Feris, 144 A.D.2d 691; People v. Basso, 140 A.D.2d 448, 450). Accordingly, the jury properly rejected the defendant's affirmative defense.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of whether the evidence seized from his apartment should have been suppressed ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, the defendant's claim is without merit. The evidence presented at the hearing demonstrated that the initial warrantless entry into the apartment by the police fell within the emergency doctrine exception to the warrant requirement ( see People v. Molnar, 98 N.Y.2d 328, 329; People v. Dixon, 281 A.D.2d 430). The subsequent entry and seizure were proper, even though the crime scene, by that time, had been secured by the police and the emergency had abated, because a continued police presence was maintained, the items seized were in plain view, and the seizure was within several hours of the initial entry ( see People v. Dixon, supra; People v. Rielly, 190 A.D.2d 695; cf. People v. Cohen, 87 A.D.2d 77, 82-83, affd 58 N.Y.2d 844, cert denied 461 U.S. 930).
The defendant's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.