Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
and the district court will be ordered to enter a judgment of acquittal on both of those counts on remand. 1 . Inasmuch as we are vacating each of the defendants’ convictions on Counts 2 through 13, and Inge’s convictions on two counts, we need not address the claims of error that pertain to sentencing. We will, however, address certain evidentiary rulings that are challenged in this appeal as the same issues may again arise if the Defendants are retried on the tax evasion charges. 2 . The Donatos were charged in Counts 14 through 17 and McKee in Counts 18 through 21. 3 . Courts of Appeals are split on whether a constructive amendment to an indictment are per se reversible error under plain error review. Compare United States v. Floresca, 38 F.3d 706, 712-13 (4th Cir.1994) (en banc)  with United States v. Fletcher, 121 F.3d 187,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that it is per se reversible error to prohibit adverse inference questioning of the venire
B. holding the erroneous deprivation of the right to counsel constitutes per se reversible error
C. holding trial errors are subject to a harmless error analysis
D. holding that constructive amendments which are per se reversible under harmless error analysis are also per se reversible under plain error analysis
E. holding that per se statutory rule is not permissible under fourth amendment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.