Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
and dissenting in part) (citations omitted) (emphasis in the original). Our courts have recognized the authority of a trial court to grant a verdict in arrest of judgment to prevent entry of judgment on the insufficiency of the indictment or some other fatal defect appearing on the face of the record. Id. at 286, 337 S.E.2d at 886 (Ness, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part); State v. Brown, 201 S.C. 417, 23 S.E.2d 381 (1942) (ruling that motion for arrest in judgment should have been granted where trial court did not have jurisdiction to impose sentence); State v. Cooler, 30 S.C. 105, 8 S.E. 692 (1889) (finding that the fact a juror was a member of the grand jury that indicted defendant was not grounds for arrest of judgment); State v. Jeter, 47 S.C. 2, 24 S.E. 889 (1896) ; State v. Blakeney, 33 S.C. 111, 11 S.E. 637
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the trial court erred in denying the defendants motion in arrest of judgment when the indictment lacked a material element and it was not apparent that the grand jury based the indictment on facts that satisfy this element of the crime and that the only permissible cure was to send the matter back to the grand jury
B. holding that trial court erred in denying motion for judgment of acquittal when state failed to prove venue
C. holding trial court erred in denying defendants motion for arrest of judgment where indictment was insufficient
D. holding that trial courts limited findings were insufficient to allow determination of whether trial court abused its discretion in denying defendants motion to dismiss his indictment on constitutional speedy trial grounds
E. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.