With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 501 U.S. 808 (1991). 76 See U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV; Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 666 (1962). 77 Booth, 482 U.S. at 502-09. 78 Id. 79 490 U.S. 805 (1989), overruled in part by Payne, 501 U.S. 808. 80 501 U.S. at 827-30. 81 Id. at 822-27. 82 Id. at 830 n.2. 83 108 Nev. 127, 136-37, 825 P.2d 600, 606 (1992). 84 See, e.g., Rippo v. State, 113 Nev. 1239, 1261, 946 P.2d 1017, 1031 (1997); Atkins v. State, 112 Nev. 1122, 1136, 923 P.2d 1119, 1128 (1996); McNelton v. State, 111 Nev. 900, 906 & n.4, 900 P.2d 934, 937 & n.4 (1995). 85 Floyd v. State, 118 Nev. 156, 174, 42 P.3d 249, 261 (2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1196 (2003); see also McNelton, 111 Nev. at 905-06, 900 P.2d at 937-38. 86 Gallego v. State, 117 Nev. 348, 370, 23 P.3d 227, 242 (2001); Rippo, 113 Ne 473, 484 (1997) (<HOLDING>). 94 See Sherman v. State, 114 Nev. 998, 1014,

A: holding that in light of the affirmative constitutional mandate to provide impartial juries in criminal cases the state has an important interest in obtaining juries that do not contain members who because of their religious beliefs are unable to follow the law or the trial courts instructions
B: recognizing that this court presumes that juries follow district courts instructions
C: recognizing that jurors are presumed to follow instructions
D: holding that the law presumes that the jury will follow the courts instructions
B.