Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
State’s decision to characterize that failure as a finding drat K.S. was incompetent to testify. Yet the record demonstrates the State consistently and adamantly characterized Simpson’s efforts to prevent the witness from testifying as a disqualification issue and repeatedly urged the district court to conduct a hearing on her competency as required by statute. The district court’s failure to focus on the State’s argument or to provide any clear basis for its ruling should not fall upon the State. Instead, I would hold that the district court clearly abused its discretion by failing to identify or isolate any legal basis for its harsh ruling despite the State’s efforts to provide the court with a framework for doing, so. See State v. Hernandez, 294 Kan. 200, 207, 273 P.3d 774 (2012) ; State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541, 550, 256 P.3d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding trial court abused its discretion when it struck the appellants intervention
B. holding that the bia abused its discretion when it denied petitioners motion to reopen by failing to consider evidence of country conditions
C. holding trial court abused its discretion by refusing to conduct hearing and render decision on motion
D. holding trial court abused its discretion when it denied a motion for mistrial after erroneously concluding an issue could be dealt with at sentencing
E. holding that the district court acted within its discretion when it denied plaintiffs request for counsel
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.