Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
appellate precedent.” Id. at 201. Specifically, at the time of the GPS tracking in Fisher, “the Supreme Court had strongly indicated, and the Sixth Circuit and three other circuits had held, that the warrantless use of electronic tracking devices was permissible.” Id. at 203. Also, as the Seventh Circuit has recognized, “circuits that did not have their own GPS precedent prior to Jones have uniformly concluded that [the Supreme Court’s decision in] Knotts is binding appellate precedent for the purpose of Davis’s good-faith exception, even when police officers’ GPS monitoring lasted for a longer period of time.” United States v. Taylor, 776 F.3d 513, 518 n.2 (7th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (citing cases); see also United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276, 103 S.Ct. 1081, 75 L.Ed.2d 55 (1983) . Here, the GPS tracking took place during
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that although search of passenger compartment was legal search of trunk was not
B. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises
C. holding that monitoring of a signal from a beeper was not a search
D. holding that while search incident to arrest could not justify search in that case probable cause plus exigency justified search
E. holding that search of shoulder bag was not authorized by search warrant for apartment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.