With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". due process guarantees. See Payne, 501 U.S. at 825, 111 S.Ct. 2597; id. at 831, 111 S.Ct. 2597 (O’Connor, J., concurring). We hold that victim impact evidence, brief and narrowly presented, is admissible during the penalty phase of death penalty cases. {38} Further, we hold that victim impact testimony is consistent with the Capital Felony Sentencing Act following Payne because it constitutes additional evidence as to the circumstances of the crime under Section 31-20A-1(C) and NMSA 1978, § 31-20A-2(B) (1979). Through Section 31-2CA-1(C), the Legislature requires the jury to consider evidence of the circumstance of the crime, and many other courts have also held that victim impact testimony is relevant for this purpose. See United States v. McVeigh, 153 F.3d 1166, 1219 (10th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1007, 119 S.Ct. 1148,

A: holding that the effects of the victims deaths upon the families is part of the circumstances of the crime and is properly presented to the jury at the penalty phase
B: holding that one of the primary purposes of the fmla is to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families 
C: holding that the impact upon the victims is relevant to circumstances of the crime
D: holding that mental health evidence could be mitigating at the penalty phase even though it is insufficient to establish a legal defense to conviction in the guilty phase
A.