Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
See Arkansas Supreme Court Rule l-2(a)(6). The Commission’s Rule of Procedure 12 addresses the procedure by which the Arkansas Supreme Court reviews Commission decisions. Specifically, Rule 12(F) provides that “The Supreme Court may bring up for review any action taken upon any complaint filed with the Commission, and may also bring up for review a case in which the Commission has failed to act.” Rules of Procedure of the Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Comm’n 12(F) (emphasis supplied). Under Arkansas law, the Arkansas Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear constitutional challenges to a disciplinary matter so long as these issues were raised before the Commission. See Huffman v. Arkansas Judicial Discipline and Disability Comm’n, 344 Ark. 274, 42 S.W.3d 386, 390 (2001) . Here, the Commission held a probable cause
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a claim including a constitutional claim must have been asserted to the trial court to be raised on appeal
B. holding that a judges constitutional challenges to commissions admonition would have been considered by the arkansas supreme court had such matters been on the record
C. holding if the admonition would have cured the prejudice there is no necessity for a mistrial even if the appellant declined to request an admonition
D. holding that only materials which were included in the pretrial record and that would have been admissible evidence may be considered
E. holding that the court had an adequate record to grant the defendants motion for summary judgment because the relevant evidence would have been in plaintiffs possession
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.