Opinion ID: 1255692
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Bollinger's Tattoo

Text: Bollinger argues that allowing the jury to view the tatoo was overly prejudicial in light of the fact that he received the death penalty for the murder of Rose, whose body was more severely burned than that of James. The State responds that the tatoo was directly relevant in illuminating Bollinger's character. The State reasons that the tattoo is a testament to who Bollinger is and what he did, indicating a lack of remorse. We conclude that the State is correct. NRS 175.552(3) allows the district court to admit evidence concerning aggravating and mitigating circumstances relative to the offense, defendant or victim and on any other matter which the court deems relevant to sentence, whether or not the evidence is ordinarily admissible. The tattoo is relevant evidence concerning Bollinger's character. The fact that Bollinger received this tattoo after he killed and burned Rose and James is highly illuminating. Although the State concedes that Bollinger did not devise his nickname, the record reveals that Bollinger chose the type of tattoo he received.