Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
we must then decide if that improper factor was significant enough to remand the cause for resentencing. Matters considered by the legislature in determining the authorized range of sentences which are inherent in the offense are not proper aggravating factors to be considered in a sentencing hearing. (People v. Conover (1981), 84 Ill. 2d 400, 419 N.E.2d 906.) In Conover, the Illinois Supreme Court held that it was improper for a trial court to consider receipt of proceeds from a burglary or theft as an aggravating factor in determining the length of a sentence. Proceeds were an inherent part of the crime of burglary or theft and had already been considered by the legislature when it determined the range of penalties. (See also People v. Martin (1988), 119 Ill. 2d 453, 519 N.E.2d 884 ; People v. Saldivar (1986), 113 Ill. 2d 256,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the death of a victim may not be considered an aggravating factor in a homicide sentencing
B. recognizing that the governments failure to prevail is a factor that may be considered
C. recognizing attorneys substantial experience in the practice of law as an aggravating factor
D. holding that a sentencing judge sitting without a jury may not find an aggravating circumstance necessary for imposition of the death penalty
E. recognizing that the fear experienced by the victim before death is a significant factor in determining the existence of this aggravating circumstance
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.