DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Where conflicting expert testimony is presented, the question whether the defendant suffered from a mental disease or defect at the time of the commission of the crime is for the fact finder, who may accept or reject the opinion of any expert (see, People v. Esmail, 260 A.D.2d 396; People v. Bergamini, 223 A.D.2d 548, 549). In this case, the Trial Judge clearly accepted the testimony of the People's expert that the defendant, despite his mental illness, knew and appreciated the consequences of his actions at the time of the crime, and knew that his actions were wrong (see, People v. Esmail, supra; People v. Lombard, 258 A.D.2d 476). As we discern no serious flaw in the testimony of the People's expert, the Trial Judge's finding of sanity will not be disturbed (see, People v. Lombard, supra; People v. Bernstein, 255 A.D.2d 388; People v. Bergamini, supra). Accordingly, the finding of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15) .