Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
who had not filed a notice of appearance as co-counsel, attended the hearing on behalf of Coutts. Nevertheless, the hearing proceeded as scheduled. When the trial court inquired of coverage counsel if he was prepared to present evidence, coverage counsel stated to the court: “This can be decided as a matter of law.” At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court entered an order denying Coutts’s motion. On appeal, Coutts maintains, inter alia, that the trial court erred because it failed to afford the appellant an evidentia-ry hearing. This argument is without merit, as Coutts’s coverage counsel affirmatively advised the court that no eviden-tiary hearing was necessary and that the issue could be decided as a matter of law. See Pope v. State, 441 So.2d 1073, 1076 (Fla.1983) ; Behar v. Southeast Banks Trust Co., N.A., 374
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a party failing to make a timely objection to evidence at trial cannot as a matter of law be heard to complain on appeal that its admission is error constituting an irregularity in the proceeding
B. holding that defendant may not complain of error he invited and further holding that reversal cannot be based on such error
C. holding that a party may not invite error and then be heard to complain of that error on appeal
D. recognizing that a party cannot complain on appeal that the trial court considered an issue that that party consented to submit to the trial court
E. holding that invited error does not entitle the defendant to any relief and of which he will not be heard to complain on appeal
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.