Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
that this court has consistently approved of consideration by the district court as relevant conduct pursuant to § lB1.3(a) conduct that was uncharged, that was charged in a count that was subsequently dismissed, or that was charged in a count of which the defendant was acquitted). We perceive no rational basis upon which to conclude that consideration of such relevant conduct for purposes of departure would create any greater difficul 5th Cir.1994) (en banc) (same); United States v. Zamarripa, 905 F.2d 337, 341 (10th Cir.1990) (same), disapproved on other grounds, Williams v. United States, 503 U.S. 193, 198, 112 S.Ct. 1112, 1118, 117 L.Ed.2d 341 (1992); and United States v. Kim, 896 F.2d 678, 684 (2d Cir.1990) (same), with United States v. Harris, 70 F.3d 1001, 1002-04 (8th Cir.1995) ; and United States v. Castro-Cervantes, 927
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding it was unfair for the trial court to rely upon factors already considered in the presumptive sentence as a basis for a durational departure
B. holding that issues underlying all counts were sufficiently intertwined that the separate appeal of the summary judgment counts would complicate the trial of the remaining counts
C. holding that only factors specifically prohibited by the sentencing guidelines cannot form the basis for a downward departure
D. holding that severance was not required when a defendant was charged with five counts of forcible rape two counts of felonious restraint three counts of kidnapping two counts of armed criminal action two counts of forcible sodomy one count of second degree assault one count of first degree robbery and one count of stealing
E. holding that conduct from dismissed counts cannot be relied upon as a basis for departure
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.