Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
(Tex.Crim.App. 2002). In the context of a guilty plea, an error affects substantial rights when, considering the record as a whole, we do not have a fair assurance that the defendant’s decision to plead guilty would not have changed had the trial court properly admonished him. Anderson v. State, 182 S.W.3d 914, 919 (Tex.Crim.App.2006). 2. Analysis Prior to accepting his plea, the trial court admonished appellant, but failed to admonish him on the range of punishment. Appellant contends the trial court’s error in failing to admonish him on the applicable range of punishment requires reversal without a harm analysis. In support of his position, appellant relies on the Supreme Court’s opinion in Boykin. See Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 1711, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969) . We agree with the appellant that the trial
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that for a trial judge to accept a defendants guilty plea without an affirmative showing that it was intelligent and voluntary violates the defendants constitutional rights
B. holding that a voluntary and intelligent plea of guilty is an admission of all the elements of a formal criminal charge
C. holding that a guilty plea must be both knowing and voluntary and must be a voluntary and intelligent choice among the alternative courses of action available to a defendant
D. holding that due process requires state courts to make an affirmative showing that a guilty plea is intelligent and voluntary
E. holding that factual basis inquiry is one way of satisfying the constitutional requirement that a guilty plea be voluntary and intelligent but it is not mandated by due process
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.