Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
by our procedural rules. In the forty years since those decisions, Texas courts have consistently recognized and reaffirmed the existence of the fundamental-error doctrine. Because there is no statute defining the principle, we tend to agree with the commentator who noted that “[tjhere is no single satisfactory definition of the phrase, nor can one easily analyze the cases for prognostic purposes.” Kronzer, supra, § 9.2, at 205. In reviewing our caselaw, however, we are able to distill two types of error that our courts have consistently recognized are subject to fundamental-error review. First, and most commonly, we apply fundamental-error review when a jurisdictional defect exists in the case. See, e.g., Texas Ass’n of Bus. v. Texas Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440, 445-46 (Tex.1993) ; New York Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Sanchez,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered
B. holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal
C. holding that court will not consider issue raised for first time on appeal
D. holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court
E. holding that standing is a jurisdictional issue that can be raised for the first time on appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.