Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Restitution Order In issue three, appellant argues that the trial court had no authority to compel appellant, as a condition of probation, to make restitution to anyone other than DBS, the named complainant. A trial court may not order restitution to be paid to a person who was not a victim of the charged offense. Martin v. State, 874 S.W.2d 674, 677-78 (Tex.Crim.App.1994). In order to preserve error concerning a probation order, however, a defendant must make a timely and specific objection. Tex.R.App. P. 33.1(a)(1)(A); see Idowu v. State, 73 S.W.3d 918, 921 (Tex.Crim.App.2002) (stating if defendant wishes to complain about appropriateness of trial court’s restitution order, he must do so in trial court); see also Lemos v. State, 27 S.W.3d 42, 47 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2000, pet. refd) . There is no evidence in the record to reflect
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding complaint that sentence violated equal protection was waived because of failure to object at trial
B. holding party failing to adequately brief complaint waived issue on appeal
C. holding that party waived complaint regarding instruction where it did not raise specific objection
D. holding that a complaint is waived by the failure to object during the witness unsworn testimony
E. holding defendant waived complaint
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.