Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
CURIAM: Roderick L 8, 285-86 (4th Cir.2005) . Moreover, Lattimore did not challenge any
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that application of career offender enhancement falls within exception for prior convictions where facts are undisputed making it unnecessary for district court to engage in further fact finding about prior convictions
B. holding that nature and occasion of offenses are facts inherent in convictions and those facts need not be alleged in indictment or submitted to jury
C. holding that fact of prior conviction is not subject to booker requirements that convictions cannot be severed from their essential components including the integral facts such as the statutory violation and date of offense and that these facts are inherent to convictions not extraneous to them
D. holding that prior convictions could not be severed from their essential components and these components include integral facts such as the statutory violation and date of offense therefore these facts were inherent to convictions not extraneous to them
E. holding that prior convictions could not be severed from their essential components such as separateness location and dates of of fenses and that therefore no finding of fact is made with respect to these inherent facts
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.