Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
review" to the rule 11 violations in this case. In the absence of express language in any of our cases holding that harmless error review does not apply to preserved claims of rule l1(e) violations, the State nevertheless urges us to apply harmless error review of preserved rule 11 violations because "it does so in nearly every other context," because "other states do so," or because it is good public policy. We decline to do so. T76 First, the State argues that because we apply harmless error in other contexts, we should also apply harmless error to a preserved rule 11(e) claim of error. In support of its argument, the State cites to cases involving the question of whether a trial court's error affected the outcome of a trial. See, eg., State v. Bales, 675 P.2d 578, 576 (Utah 1983) ; State v. Chapman, 655 P.2d 1119, 1125 (Utah
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt
B. holding that the trial courts erroneous admission of an experts opinion that the defendant was guilty was harmless where the prosecution produced overwhelming evidence of guilt
C. holding that erroneous instruction that flight from the scene of the crime implied guilt was harmless because there was other evidence to sustain a conviction
D. recognizing that if there is evidence upon which one may reasonably infer an element of the crime the evidence is sufficient to sustain that element and where reasonable minds could differ the evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction
E. holding that mcbrides presence at and flight from the scene was insufficient to sustain his conviction where the state failed to present any evidence that established mcbrides intent that the victim be shot or that he committed an act in furtherance of the shooting
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.