Opinion ID: 1200475
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to object to the charge against sympathy.

Text: At the start of appellant's trial, the judge instructed the jury that it must not be influenced by any personal feelings of sympathy for or against any party. A similar charge was given before the jury went into deliberation. Defense counsel failed to object to either charge. Appellant argues that the court's charge against sympathy violated California v. Brown, 479 U.S. 538, 107 S.Ct. 837, 93 L.Ed.2d 934 (1987), and that counsel's failure to object on the basis of the Brown decision constituted ineffective assistance. In Brown, the Court upheld the use of an instruction against sympathy only because the defendant was afforded the opportunity to present mitigating circumstances. 479 U.S. at 541-43, 107 S.Ct. at 839-40. Appellant argues that, because he was not afforded a similar opportunity to present mitigating circumstances at trial, the charge against sympathy was in error and defense counsel was ineffective in failing to object to it. The State argues that appellant's decision not to present mitigating factors was a matter of trial tactics in conformity with his innocence theory of defense, and that any appeal to the jury for sympathy would have detracted from this theory. We agree with the State's assertion that failure to present mitigating circumstances was a tactical decision and should not be second-guessed by this court. Wilson, 99 Nev. at 372, 664 P.2d at 334; Watkins, 93 Nev. at 102, 560 P.2d at 922. Furthermore, we do not believe that an opportunity for informing the jury of mitigating circumstances was procedurally warranted in this case. All of the authority cited by appellant pertains to the presentation of mitigating circumstances during a bifurcated penalty phase hearing where the imposition of the death penalty is a sentencing option. [1] The State did not seek the death penalty in this case. On direct appeal, this court dismissed appellant's contention that he was entitled to a bifurcated penalty hearing. We stand by that ruling on the current appeal.