Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
The Sixth Circuit has since narrowed its holding in Benes. See United States v. Del Percio, 870 F.2d 1090 (6th Cir. 1989) (recognizing that the statute of limitations is not a jurisdictional bar, but rather a waivable affirmative defense that does not affect the subject-matter jurisdiction of the court, but not reaching whether the failure to assert the defense in the trial court constitutes a waiver). The issue (at least in the federal arena) has now largely been put to rest by the United States Supreme Court’s recent pronouncement in Musacchio, 136 S.Ct. at 717: [T]he statute-of-limitations defense becomes a part of a case only if the defendant puts the defense in issue. When a defendant presses a limitations defense, the Government then bears the burden of establishing complia 011) ; Adams v. Hawai’i, 103 Hawai’i 214, 81 P.3d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the running of the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense
B. holding that the statute of limitations in a criminal case is a nonjurisdictional affirmative defense that is waived if not raised in the trial court
C. holding that the statute of limitations is nonjurisdictional and defendant expressly waived it observing in dicta that a statute of limitations defense should be raised no later than the trial
D. holding that complaint need not anticipate statute of limitations which is an affirmative defense
E. holding that statute of limitations is an affirmative defense is waived if not raised in the trial court and does not require a knowing and intelligent waiver
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.