Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
factor listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and made explicit note of its focus on Cogswell’s history and characteristics, the nature and circumstances of the offense, and the need to avoid any unwarranted sentencing disparities among similarly situated defendants. Regarding this last factor, the district court noted that the disparities among the sentences that the court had imposed on the co-defendants were attributable to a number of factors, including that each defendant had different ist the government may receive sentence reductions. See Vázquez-Rivera, 470 F.3d at 449 (finding the defendant’s sentence not to be unreasonable “simply because his co-defendants agreed to help the government in exchange for reduced sentences”); United States v. Rodríguez, 162 F.3d 135, 152 (1st Cir.1998) . Taking into account Cogswell’s age, level of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that imposition of lengthy sentences did not show prejudice where sentences were warranted by facts shown in the evidence
B. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to modify hfo sentences where sentences were not illegal and sixty days had transpired since imposition of the sentence
C. holding that any disparity between the defendants sentence and sentences imposed in fasttrack districts was considered appropriately as a single and not controlling factor
D. holding that crackpowder disparity was constitutional stating that ujntil the en banc court of this circuit the us supreme court or congress itself accepts this assertion of disparity and finds it untenable challenges to the sentencing guidelines based on the disparity between sentences for crack cocaine and powder cocaine will continue to fail
E. holding that the law allows the government to offer reduced sentences in exchange for assistance even if it results in sentences of such disparity as would strike many as unfair
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.