Opinion ID: 1316831
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Admission of Photographs of the Victim into Evidence.

Text: At trial, the defendant objected to the admission of two photographs on the grounds that they were inflammatory, cumulative and that their prejudicial nature outweighed their probative value. We do not agree. One photograph was used to illustrate the condition of the body as it was found, i.e., the bruises and injuries on the body, the state of decomposition, and the disarray of the clothing. The second photograph showed the body in the location in which it was found. The terrain was the subject of much testimony concerning the rate of decomposition and time of death. Furthermore, the terrain around the body was relevant to the defendant's claim that a recent leg injury made it unlikely that he would be able to walk about in that area. The defendant bears the burden of showing an abuse of discretion by the trial court in admitting these photographs. State v. Bell . We find that the defendant has not carried this burden. Furthermore, the usefulness of these exhibits in illustrating and corroborating testimony establishes their admissibility. State v. Hutchinson, 99 N.M. 616, 661 P.2d 1315 (1983). The probative value of these exhibits outweighed any prejudice to the defendant. We therefore find these photographs were properly admitted into evidence. Having found no error by the trial court, the defendant's convictions are affirmed. IT IS SO ORDERED. FEDERICI, C.J., and PAYNE, J., concur.