Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
1 (1978)). In reviewing a sufficiency challenge, “[t]he verdict of a jury must be sustained if there is substantial evidence, taking the view most favorable to the Government, to support it.” Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942). “[S]ubstantial evidence is evidence that a reasonable finder of fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir.1996) (en banc). In evaluating the sufficiency of the evidence, this court does not “weigh the evidence or review the credibility of the witnesses.” United States v. Wilson, 118 F.3d 228, 234 (4th Cir.1997). When the evidence supports differing reasonable interpretations, the Cir.1999) ; United States v. Kimble, 178 F.3d 1163, 1168
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a bank customer did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records maintained by the bank
B. holding that the presence requirement of the carjacking statute was satisfied when keys were taken from a restaurant employee whose car was parked outside the restaurant
C. holding that the prisoner should have been allowed to choose whether to leave his car parked in a public parking lot
D. holding that the presence requirement of the carjacking statute was satisfied when keys were taken from a bank employee whose car was parked in a parking lot outside the bank
E. holding judge in bank robbery prosecution did not abuse discretion in refusing to excuse juror whose wife was bank employee or juror whose daughter had been victim of bank robbery
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.