Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
blood alcohol content); Toler v. State, 623 So.2d 408, 411 (Ala.Crim.App.1993) (refusing to instruct on intoxication even though the defendant had “way too much to drink” and “could not remember some things that occurred”). Petitioner was indeed drunk on the night the crimes were committed, but “[generally, voluntary drunkenness is no defense to a criminal charge.... [T]he degree of intoxication which must be demonstrated to exonerate a defendant is great.” State v. Gover, 267 Md. 602, 606-07, 298 A.2d 378, 381 (1973). Petitioner simply cannot point to evidence sufficient to satisfy that standard, leaving us with no basis to hold that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to give the instruction. See Dickey v. State, 404 Md. 187, 199, 203-04, 946 A.2d 444, 451, 454 (2008) ; Perry v. State, 344 Md. 204, 242, 686 A.2d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a trial judge is obliged to give a correct jury instruction notwithstanding that request for instruction was technically erroneous if the evidence generates the subject matter of the jury instruction
B. holding that the defendant could not appeal a jury instruction where he did not object to the challenged instruction but in fact requested it and stated he was satisfied with it
C. holding that the requested instruction did not state the applicable law and the trial court was not required to grant it citing rule 4  325c
D. holding that issue of inadequate jury instruction was waived because the instruction given was the one expressly requested by defense counsel
E. holding that the requested instruction was not required under rule 4325c because even assuming that the requested instruction was a correct statement of law the trial judge exercised his discretion properly
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.