Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
of the saliva swabs and DNA evidence, which the trial court similarly overruled. After completion of the trial — which began and concluded on October 15, 2003 — the jury convicted Wyche as to all three counts of the information. On November 12, 2003, the trial court imposed a ten-year sentence as to Counts I and III, credited Wyche with 220 days time served, and ordered a five-year term of probation as to Count II. The trial court also adjudicated Wyche a habitual felony offender under section 775.04, Florida Statutes. On appeal, the First District issued a broad opinion with sweeping language, which affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress and held that deception is largely if not totally irrelevant for purposes of conducting a voluntariness inquiry. See Wyche, 906 So.2d at 1144 . In my view, the decision of the First
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the dismissal of an indictment did not negate the presumption of probable cause
B. holding the fact that officers belief proved to be mistaken does not negate a finding of probable cause
C. holding that the pendency of postconviction motion does not negate the finality of convictions for immigration removal purposes
D. holding that a suspects ability to proffer an innocent explanation for the facts does not negate probable cause
E. holding without qualification that djeception does not negate consent
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.