Opinion ID: 1154934
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: defense of extreme emotional disturbance

Text: Defendant contends that the trial court improperly instructed the jury about the affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance (EED) [3] and erroneously excluded testimony by defendant's expert witness related to EED. A. Jury Instructions. Defendant's first challenge is to the trial court's jury instructions concerning the EED defense. The trial court instructed the jury that defendant had raised the defense of extreme emotional disturbance and that the EED defense, if proved by a preponderance of the evidence, would reduce an intentional homicide that otherwise would constitute murder to manslaughter in the first degree. The court further instructed the jury that the EED defense applied only to the lesser-included offense of intentional murder, but not to the charge of aggravated felony murder or to the lesser-included offense of felony murder. Defendant excepted to those instructions, arguing that EED is a defense to aggravated felony murder.