Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
were not alleged in the indictment, whether he was an organizer or leader should not have been submitted to the jury. Because the jury concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Soreide was an organizer or leader, and because Soreide was sentenced to 236 months imprisonment, which was below the statutory maximum of 20 years imprisonment, the district court did not unconstitutionally amend the indictment by enhancing Soreide’s sentence based on his role as an organizer or leader. As to Soreide’s argument that the district court failed to make the necessary findings under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), we have held that a sentencing court is not obligated to specifically address and analyze on the record every factor set forth in § 3553(a). United States v. Scott, 426 F.3d 1324, 1329 (11th Cir.2005) . We find that the district court adequately
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a district court does not have to state on the record that it considered every  3553a factor
B. recognizing that many of the  3553a factors are already incorporated into any guidelines determination and the  3553a factors can themselves overlap
C. holding that nothing in booker or elsewhere requires the district court to state on the record that it has explicitly considered each of the  3553a factors or to discuss each of the  3553a factors
D. holding that to establish reasonableness of a sentence a district court need not explicitly discuss every  3553a factor on the record
E. holding a sentencing court is not obligated to expressly weigh on the record each of the factors set out in  3553a
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.