Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
facial vagueness challenge as he contends. 8 . Appellant’s first point of error addresses the state constitution and his second point addresses the federal constitution. The corresponding "due process” provision of the Texas Constitution provides: "No citizen of this State shall be deprived of life, liberty, property, privileges or immunities, or in any manner disfranchised, except by the due course of the law of the land.” Tex. Const, art. I, § 19. Historically, courts have equated the due course of law clause in the Texas Constitution with the guarantee of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. See Norris v. State, 788 S.W.2d 65, 72 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1990, pet. ref’d); see also University of Tex. Med. Sch. v. Than, 901 S.W.2d 926, 929 (Tex.1995) . Appellant does not provide substantively
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that there is no due process right to appellate review
B. holding that due process requires at a minimum an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner
C. holding that procedural due process requires adequate notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard
D. holding that there is no distinction in the right to jury trial between sentencing factors and elements
E. holding there is no meaningful distinction between due course and due process
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.