Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
exercise our discretion to address the error. The state posits only one reason why we should not correct the error: “[d]espite several opportunities to bring the alleged error to the trial court’s attention— by demurring to the indictment, excepting to the jury instructions, moving for judgment of acquittal or requesting merger at the sentencing hearing, defense counsel failed [to] alert the court below to the error defendant now claims was obvious.” Although defendant’s failure to preserve the error is an appropriate consideration, see Ailes, 312 Or at 382 n 2, we have repeatedly held that, in most circumstances, the state does not have a compelling interest in salvaging multiple convictions when only one is lawful. See, e.g., State v. Donner, 230 Or App 465, 469, 215 P3d 928 (2009) . In our view, that is the overriding factor at
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that tgiven that our burden in reviewing and correcting the error is minimal and that sentencing defendant according to the law serves the ends of justice we elect to exercise our discretion to correct the error here
B. holding that we must first determine our jurisdiction before proceeding to the merits of the appeal
C. recognizing that we may not substitute our judgment for that of the alj 
D. holding we elect to adhere to our precedent in newman 
E. holding the burden is on the defendant to demonstrate the error satisfies each prong of the plain error test
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.