With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". marks and citation omitted); State v. Telles, 1999-NMCA-013, ¶ 12, 126 N.M. 593, 973 P.2d 845. Although Defendants contend that evidence of Victim’s .245 percent BAC would have tended to show that Defendants were reasonable in their apprehension and that Victim was the first aggressor, Defendants have not supplied authority to support this proposition. There undoubtedly is in many instances a correlation between alcohol and violence. However, as the district court observed, although it is clear that BAC may demonstrate impaired ability to drive a motor vehicle, a correlation between BAC and aggressiveness seems speculative unless tied more specifically to an individual’s history. As such, the probative value of the BAC evidence in this case is questionable at best. Cf. id. ¶ 14 (<HOLDING>). Even if some relevance had been found, the

A: holding that the victim impact and victim vulnerability aggravators were not overbroad and explaining that though the concepts of victim impact and victim vulnerability may well be relevant in every case evidence of victim vulnerability and victim impact in a particular case is inherently individualized
B: holding evidence of sexual assault relevant to show defendants motive in kidnapping victim
C: holding bac of 05 percent not relevant in vehicular homicide case to show that the victim somehow contributed to the accident
D: holding that uncharged sexual acts committed upon the same victim are admissible to show the conduct of the defendant toward the victim and to corroborate the evidence of the offense charged in the indictment
C.