Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
507-08. The statement in this case about which defendant complains is distinguishable from that made by the Harbison attorney and does not amount to ineffective assistance. Trial counsel here was pointing out to the jury that specific intent was lacking in this case and that the lack of specific intent was the only difference between second-degree and first-degree murder. Defense counsel was arguing to the jury that, without specific intent, the most serious crime for which defendant could be convicted would be second-degree murder. This situation differs substantially from Harbison, where the attorney argued, “ T think you should find him guilty of manslaughter and not first degree.’ ” Id. at 178, 337 S.E.2d at 506. See State v. Harvell, 334 N.C. 356, 361, 432 S.E.2d 125, 128 (1993) . The statement in the present case does not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding the crime of conspiracy is committed or not before the substantive crime begins
B. holding that counsel did not admit the defendant was guilty of a crime when counsel noted that if the evidence established the commission of any crime that crime was voluntary manslaughter not murder
C. holding that firstdegree murder is one crime although the defendant can commit the crime in several ways
D. holding that unlike the specificintent crime of firstdegree murder seconddegree murder is a generalintent crime for which the defense of voluntary intoxication is not available
E. holding counsel must only provide relevant facts of the crime
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.