Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
court. MEYERS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. 1 . Tex. Penal Code § 46.04. 2 . U.S. Const, amends. IV, V, VI, XIV; Tex. Const, art. I, § 9; Tex.Code Crim. Proc. art. 38.23. 3 . The State’s objection that the proffered documents “were not on file 14 days before this date of trial as required under the Rules of Evidence” was sustained. Apparent 32 S.W.3d 853, 856, n. 22 (Tex.Crim.App.2000). 16 . U.S. Const, amend. IV. 17 . See generally Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives’ Ass'n, 489 U.S. 602, 619, 109 S.Ct. 1402, 103 L.Ed.2d 639 (1989) ("Except in certain well-defined circumstances, a search or seizure ... is not reasonable unless it is accomplished pursuant to a judicial warrant issued upon probable cause.”); Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 558, 99 S.Ct. 1861, 60 L.Ed.2d 447 (1979) ; Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85, 91, 100
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that policy requiring strip searches of prisoners prior to transfer did not violate fourth amendment
B. holding that bodycavity searches of prisoners are not unreasonable
C. holding that a plaintiff stated a fourth amendment claim where consecutive bodycavity searches were unnecessary
D. holding that prisoners have no legitimate expectation of privacy and that the fourth amendments prohibition on unreasonable searches does not apply in prison cells
E. holding searches conducted without a warrant based on probable cause are presumptively unreasonable
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.