Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
it, for example, by informing the jury that as a matter of law, he was not responsible for CWs death. See, e.g., Lucas v. United States, 102 A.3d 270, 279 (D.C.2014) (“ ‘[I]m-proper prosecutorial comments are looked upon with special disfavor when they appear in the rebuttal because at that point defense counsel has no opportunity to contest or ciar ify what the prosecutor has said.’ ” (quoting Anthony v. United States, 935 A.2d 275, 284 (D.C.2007))). The lack of a limiting instruction also compounded the effect of the prosecutor’s comment. Specifically, the court failed to instruct the jurors that CW’s death should not be considered as evidence of Nofoa’s guilt in the terroristic threatening and kidnapping ease. Cf. State v. Murray, 116 Hawai'i 3, 19, 169 P.3d 955, 971 (2007) ; State v. Cordeiro, 99 Hawai'i 390, 416, 56
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that in admitting evidence the failure of the trial court to give a limiting instruction sua sponte is not reversible error
B. holding that a trial court errs when it fails to give a limiting instruction properly requested by a party
C. holding that failure to give a limiting instruction for 404b evidence is not plain error
D. holding the potential for undue prejudice is so great that failure to give a limiting instruction with regard to prior convictions results in error even if the defendant has not requested one citing evans v cowan 506 f2d 1248 1249 6th cir1974
E. recognizing that a limiting instruction has the potential to cure any prejudice from the erroneous admission of evidence
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.