Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
1255, 1260 (8th Cir.1994) (Cabbell), this court reversed an obstruction of justice enhancement because “the district court did not evaluate [the defendant’s] testimony in a light most favorable to him as required by section 3C1.1, application note 1.” Howev er, we note that, effective November 1, 1997, “an amendment to [§ 3C1.1] ... removed the ‘ “most favorable” language and advised courts simply to “be cognizant that inaccurate testimony or statement may result from confusion, mistake, or faulty memory, and thus not all testimony or statements necessarily reflect a willful attempt to obstruct justice.” ’ ” United States v. Greer, 285 F.3d 158, —, 2000 WL 33709971, at *22, (2d Cir.2002) (amending previous opinion); see also United States v. Behler, 100 F.3d 632, 638 (8th Cir.1996) , cert. denied, 522 U.S. 855, 118 S.Ct. 152,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing first amendment retaliation right
B. recognizing first amendment and fourteenth amendment interests in inmate correspondence
C. holding that the fourteenth amendment incorporated the sixth amendment right to counsel
D. recognizing amendment to  3c11
E. holding the sixth amendment applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.