Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
E.g., Gafford v. State, 387 So.2d 333, 337 (Fla.1980); Lewis v. State, 377 So.2d 640, 646-47 (Fla.1980); Fleming v. State, 374 So.2d 954, 957-59 (Fla.1979). The United States Supreme Court has reversed a death sentence on federal constitutional grounds where the state supreme court rejected all three of the theories relied on by the sentencing jury in support of an aggravating factor. Presnell v. Georgia, 439 U.S. 14, 99 S.Ct. 235, 58 L.Ed.2d 207 (1978) (per curiam). The Court held the defendant’s right to due process was violated by the state supreme court’s affirmance of his sentence on the basis of a theory that the sentencing jury had not been instructed to consider. Id. at 16-17, 99 S.Ct. at 236-237. See also Godfrey v. Georgia, 446 U.S. 420, 100 S.Ct. 1759, 64 L.Ed.2d 398 (1980) . 44 . An essential premise of the Majority’s
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the death of a victim may not be considered an aggravating factor in a homicide sentencing
B. recognizing that the fear experienced by the victim before death is a significant factor in determining the existence of this aggravating circumstance
C. holding sentencers application of outrageously or wantonly vile horrible and inhuman aggravating factor to particular case unconstitutional and invalidating death sentence based solely on that factor
D. holding evidence sufficient to support aggravating factor of old age
E. recognizing attorneys substantial experience in the practice of law as an aggravating factor
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.