Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
CURIAM. Anton Cross appeals from the sentence the District Court imposed after he pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy offense. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the District Court (1) erred in determining that the Fair Sentencing Act did not apply retroactively to Cross and (2) abused its discretion in sentencing him. As to the District Court’s determination regarding the applicability of the Fair Sentencing Act, we find no error in light of this Court’s recent decision in United States v. Sidney, 648 F.3d 904, 910 (8th Cir.2011) . As to the court’s imposition of sentence, we
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that section 1981a does not apply to cases arising before its enactment
B. recognizing that new law did not apply to claims that accrued prior to enactment
C. holding that the fair sentencing act does not apply retroactively to defendants whose criminal conduct occurred before its enactment even if those defendants were sentenced after its enactment
D. holding that floridas current statutory scheme that provides defendants with a choice of either electrocution or lethal injection as the method of execution is constitutional and could be retroactively applied to criminal defendants sentenced prior to the statutes enactment
E. recognizing that aedpa would not apply to a habeas petition that was pending at the time of its enactment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.