Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
withdraw guilty pleas. See Rules 4.1-4.4 of the Rules of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals. 19 . King v. State, 553 P.2d 529, 532 (Okla.Crim.App.1976) ("We have, in the past, repeatedly emphasized the serious remifications [sic] of an accused’s plea of guilty and the necessity of an adequate record reflecting compliance with procedures articulated by this Court to insure an accused’s plea of guilty is voluntarily and intelligently entered as mandated by the United States Supreme Court in Boykin v. Alabama, 20 . Although Crofford filed his petition pro se, yet another new attorney (his fourth by our calculation) entered his appearance and filed a brief in support of Crofford’s original § 2254 petition. 21 . Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 244, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969) . 22 . In addition, Crofford contends the first
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that a voluntary and understanding guilty plea entered without the benefit of a plea bargain waives all nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before the entry of the plea
B. holding defendant must have a full understanding of what the plea connotes and its consequences
C. holding that an attorney is required to advise a defendant of the direct consequences of a plea and will not be found ineffective for failing to advise of collateral consequences of the plea
D. holding that where a defendant acknowledged awareness of the consequences of his plea agreement counsels erroneous explanation of the consequences was not prejudicial
E. holding that a defendant must have knowledge of the likely consequences of entering the guilty plea in order for a plea to be voluntary and knowing
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.