Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
nolle prosequi, the trial court has broad discretion in making its findings regarding “good cause.” In striking the proper balance between the prosecution’s discretion to nolle prosequi an indictment and the Court’s power to prevent abuses of executive prerogative, courts have recognized that the prosecution is first and presumptively the best judge of where the public interest lies, and the trial court should not merely substitute its judgment for that of the prosecution. United States v. Hamm, 638 F.2d 823, 828 (5th Cir. 1981). Some courts have sought to further define the appropriate standard for making such decisions by recognizing that a court should defer to the prosecution’s request for nolle prosequi unless the prosecution is clearly wrong. Id., see Wallace, 848 F.2d at 1468 . Striking the proper balance in this area of
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding not an abuse of discretion to deny funds
B. recognizing the public interest exception
C. recognizing courts discretion to deny dismissal if motion is prompted by considerations clearly contrary to public interest
D. holding that after siegel courts no longer have the discretion to deny amended exemptions based upon equitable considerations
E. holding it was not an abuse of discretion to deny funds
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.