Judgment affirmed.
The statement which the defendant made to the nurse who treated him soon after his arrest was not a privileged communication because the information contained in the statement was not necessary to enable her to treat his wounds (see, Green v Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 171 N.Y. 201; Holiday v. Harrows, Inc., 91 A.D.2d 1062; cf. People v. Decina, 2 N.Y.2d 133).
As the issue of the defendant's mental state at the time of the crime presented a question of fact for the jury to determine (see, People v. Cronin, 60 N.Y.2d 430), the court did not err in failing to instruct the jury to find that the defendant suffered from an extreme emotional disturbance. Furthermore, reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must (see, People v. Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196), we find that the defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
In addition, we find that, contrary to the defendant's contention, the court properly instructed the jury that legal insanity is a complete defense to a criminal charge (see, People v. Young, 65 N.Y.2d 103). The objections to language used in the charge which the defendant raises for the first time on appeal have not been preserved for review as a matter of law and we decline to address them in the interest of justice.
We have reviewed the defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.