Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
v. Wade, 116 Ill. 2d 1, 6 (1987); People v. Young, 334 Ill. App. 3d 785, 789 (2002). A trial court, upon determination of guilt, has no authority to assess a fine or impose a sentence other than that provided by statute. People ex rel. Daley v. Suria, 112 Ill. 2d 26, 38 (1986); People ex rel. Carey v. Bentivenga, 83 Ill. 2d 537, 542 (1981); People ex rel. Ward v. Moran, 54 Ill. 2d 552, 556 (1973); People ex rel. Ward v. Salter, 28 Ill. 2d 612, 615 (1963). This court and our supreme court have held that a void sentence is considered to have never been imposed and that “[a] void sentence is treated as a complete nullity, without legal effect, since inception.” People v. O’Neal, 281 Ill. App. 3d 602, 614 (1996), aff’d in part & rev’d in part by People v. Garcia, 179 Ill. 2d 55, 73 (1997) . Although O’Neal and Garcia deal with
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that remand for resentencing is appropriate when sentence for reversed conviction appears to have influenced trial courts sentence for the affirmed conviction
B. holding that on direct appeal appellate court may remand for resentencing of all counts
C. holding that in addition to a remand for clarification another option in these circumstances is to remand for resentencing
D. holding that consideration of original sentence on remand for resentencing was inapplicable when original sentences were void
E. holding that at a resentencing the state must again prove the basis for an enhanced sentence even though such evidence was produced at the original sentencing
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.