Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
because the police officers’ actions were ‘discretionary’ for the purposes of qualified immunity under federal law, they were also performing 'discretionary functions’ for the purposes of [immunity under state law].”); Greiner v. City of Champlin, 816 F.Supp. 528, 545 (D.Minn 1993) ("The federal doctrine of qualified immunity does not apply to claims brought under [state] law.”). 3 . While some jurisdictions have held that a high-speed chase does not involve an officer's discretion, see Tice v. Cramer, 133 N.J. 347, 627 A.2d 1090, 1100-01 (1993) (noting that discretionary immunity is limited to discretion exercised at highest levels of government in matters of .policy or planning and is not applicable in pursuit case); City of Pinellas Park v. Brown, 604 So.2d 1222, 1226 (Fla.1992) , the officers involved usually have had their
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding officers engaged in search entitled to immunity
B. holding that immunity did not shield officers involved in 25mile highspeed chase of traffic violator because decisions by officers to continue the chase were operational rather than discretionary acts
C. holding that police officers who engaged in a dangerous highspeed chase of a fleeing suspect were immune from suit
D. holding that an officers use of deadly force to stop a dangerous car chase did not shock the conscience because an officers poor judgment in using unreasonable force does not automatically convert the officers acts into conscience shocking conduct
E. holding officers involved in investigatory raid entitled to immunity
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.