Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
are without intrinsic merit, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of his habeas petition. I On December 11, 1994, a state trooper arrested Allen for committing an OUI offense. The State preferred charges against him. As directed by law, the Secretary of State (the Secretary) then suspended Allen’s driver’s license for ninety days. See 29 M.R.S.A. § 1311-A, reprinted in the appendix. It is said that every action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Having felt the lash of the administrative suspension, the petitioner moved to dismiss the pending criminal charge on double jeopardy grounds. The nisi prius court denied the motion, relying upon an opinion issued by Maine’s highest tribunal (the Law Court) two months earlier. See State v. Savard, 659 A.2d 1265, 1268 (Me.1995) . Instead of appealing the ruling to the Law
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that suspension of driving privileges is not punishment and does not violate an individuals right not to be subject to double jeopardy or constitute a disproportionate penalty
B. holding in materially identical circumstances that an administrative license suspension did not constitute punishment for double jeopardy purposes
C. holding that the fcas fixedpenaltyplusdoubledamages provisions does not in most cases constitute punishment for the purposes of double jeopardy
D. holding that civil forfeitures are neither punishment nor criminal for purposes of the double jeopardy clause
E. holding that a delinquency proceeding places a juvenile in jeopardy for purposes of the double jeopardy clause
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.