Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
incriminating information. See Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291, 301, 100 S.Ct. 1682, 64 L.Ed.2d 297 (1980); Drury v. State, 368 Md. 331, 335-36, 793 A.2d 567 (2002). The circuit court, however, found that Minehan was not in custody for purposes of Miranda, a finding we uphold after examining several cases and closely reading the transcript of the interrogation. Custody means a formal arrest, or another serious restriction on freedom of movement. See Miranda, 384 U.S. at 477, 86 S.Ct. 1602. It is an objective state that is entered when a suspect is “led to believe, as a reasonable person, that he is being deprived or restricted of his freedom of action or movement under pressures of official authority.” Bond v. State, 142 Md.App. 219, 228, 788 A.2d 705 (2002) (citations omitted) . Practically speaking, we must consider: where
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a juvenile questioned by an officer over the phone was not in custody
B. holding no reasonable suspicion where only indicia of criminal activity was truck driving on public road late at night
C. holding that defendant was in custody when police questioned him in his bedroom late at night
D. holding that a 17yearold questioned by an officer in the driveway outside of his home was not in custody
E. holding that ones presence in a high crime area late at night without more will not justify an investigatory stop
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.