Defendant testified that he opened the door to his apartment and was standing at the threshold, when he fatally struck the victim in response to what he perceived as the victim's aggression. This testimony did not require the court, in connection with defendant's justification defense, to give the charge defendant requested, namely, that he had no duty to retreat while inside his dwelling. Even if the truth of defendant's account is assumed, he could have avoided the victim's alleged aggression simply by closing the apartment door, without engaging in any "retreat." In any event, if there were any error in the refusal to give the requested charge, such error would have been harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence that defendant unjustifiably attacked the victim outside of defendant's apartment, which evidence leaves no significant probability, or even a reasonable possibility, that the verdict would have been different had the requested charge been given ( see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242; People v. Mojica, 264 A.D.2d 693, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 905; cf. People v. Wesley, 76 N.Y.2d 555, 560).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.