Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
examine and challenge all factual information upon which the court based his sentence." Id. ¶ 9 It is proper for the trial court to impose restitution at sentencing unless defendant objects to its imposition and requests a full hearing on the amount at that time. See Utah Code Ann. § 76-3-201(4)(e) (1999); State v. Stayer, 706 P.2d 611, 612 (Utah 1985) (per curiam). In this regard, Utah Code Ann. § 76-8-201(4)(e) (1999) states: "If the defendant objects to the imposition, amount, or distribution of the restitution, the court shall at the time of sentencing allow the defendant a full hearing on the issue." Id. (emphasis added). Thus, the statute is clear-any request for a full restitution hearing must be made at or before sentencing. Cf. Monson v. Carver, 928 P.2d 1017, 1029 (Utah 1996) ; State v. Haga, 954 P.2d 1284, 1289 (Utah
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding defendant entitled to full restitution hearing where he requested it at sentencing
B. holding trial court without jurisdiction to impose additional restitution because more than 60 days had passed between the sentencing hearing and the second restitution hearing
C. holding no restitution hearing is mandated when defendant did not object to order of restitution or request a hearing
D. holding that where the government has not presented evidence at the hearing concerning the appropriate amount of restitution    the imposition of the restitution order constitutes plain error
E. holding that equitable restitution is available but that legal restitution is not
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.