Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621, 623, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991) (determining that while the police officers lacked a reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant, the evidence was nevertheless admissible because the defendant had abandoned the drugs prior to his seizure). A panel of this court recently determined that abandoned property is subject to lawful seizure without a warrant. Wilson v. State, 825 N.E.2d 49, 51 (Ind.Ct.App.2005). Hence, such property is not subject to Fourth Amendment protection. Miller v. State, 498 N.E.2d 53, 55 (Ind.Ct.App.1986), trans. denied. By the same token, if property is abandoned after a citizen is improperly detained, the evidence is not admissible Wilson, 825 N.E.2d at 51; see also State v. Pease, 531 N.E.2d 1207, 1211-12 (Ind.Ct.App.1988) . And the seizure of an individual does not
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding extraneous evidence that defendant was using drugs admissible under rule 404b because evidence not offered to show that defendant was drug user and was using drugs at the time of the offense but to rebut the defense of consensual sex
B. holding that the trial courts damages award was against the manifest weight of the evidence because it was based upon inadmissible evidence
C. holding that evidence obtained by improper search or seizure is inadmissible
D. holding that evidence was insufficient to prove a conspiracy where the evidence did not show that individuals who sold drugs to the defendant knew that the drugs were meant to be resold
E. holding that because an improper frisk forced the defendant to abandon drugs that evidence was inadmissible
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.