Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
motion for appropriate relief was not proper because it was not made after a verdict had been reached. See State v. Handy, 326 N.C. 532, 535, 391 S.E.2d 159, 160 (1990) (motion for appropriate relief is a “post-verdict” motion); N.C.G.S. § 15A-1414(a) (1999) (motion for appropriate relief may be made “[a]fter the verdict but not more than 10 days after entry of judgment”). The Defendant’s motions, therefore, must be characterized as “pretrial” motions brought “prior to a trial that the Government had a right to prosecute and that... [Defendant was required to defend.” Sanford, 429 U.S. at 16, 50 L. Ed. 2d at 20. Accordingly, the State’s appeal of the trial court’s 14 January 2000 order is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause. See McGraw v. State, 688 So. 2d 764, 771 (Miss.) , cert. denied, 522 U.S. 830, 139 L. Ed. 2d 51
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that where a court considering a rule 12b6 motion relies on matters outside the pleading the motion must be treated as a rule 56 motion for summary judgment
B. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment
C. holding that the trial court erred by granting the defendants motion to dismiss
D. holding that motion to dismiss cannot be treated as summary judgment
E. holding pursuant to sanford and serf ass that a defendants untimely motion for acquittal made subsequent to a jury deadlock must be treated as a pretrial motion and thus review of the trial courts judgment granting such motion is not precluded by the double jeopardy clause
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.