Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
garage is part of the home. The former Fifth Circuit has held the same. In United States v. Sokolow, the former Fifth Circuit held that a police officer’s warrantless search of the defendant’s garage to record the serial numbers of air-conditioning units the officer suspected were stolen violated the Fourth Amendment. 450 F.2d 324, 325 (5th Cir. 1971). Applying the same legal analysis as it would had the officer entered any other part of the defendant’s home without a warrant, the court held that there were no exigent circumstances to justify the warrantless entry of the garage because the air-conditioning units could not have been disposed of easily and other officers were maintaining surveillance on the premises. Id.; see also Kauz v. United States, 95 F.2d 473, 474 (5th Cir.1938) . In the present case, it is undisputed that
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a drugdetection dog sniff outside a garage door at a home was not a search under the fourth amendment
B. holding that a dog sniff outside the defendants door in his apartment building was not a search within the meaning of the fourth amendment so long as the police were lawfully present in the hallway when the search occurred
C. holding that a warrantless search of garbage located within the curtilage of the defendants home violated his fourth amendment rights
D. holding that warrantless search as probation condition was a valid limitation to the defendants fourth amendment rights when defendant asserted the condition was not reasonably related to rehabilitation
E. holding that a warrantless search of a garage that was part of the same building as the defendants living quarters violated the fourth amendment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.