Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
absence of an element of fraudulent conduct from the definition of the crime has been sufficient to find that the crime was not one involving moral turpitude. See, e.g., Chaunt v. United States, 364 U.S. 350, 353, 81 S.Ct. 147, 149-50, 5 L.Ed.2d 120 (1960) (breach of peace not a crime involving moral turpitude, because no “fraudulent conduct” was involved). Courts have consistently held that statutory rape is a crime involving moral turpitude, even though it has no intent element, because such a crime is “usually classed as rape,” which “manifestly involves moral turpitude.” See, e.g., Marciano, 450 F.2d at 1025 (citing cases so holding). So, too, courts have expressed similar certainty that theft crimes involve moral turpitude. See, e.g., Dashto v. INS, 59 F.3d 697, 699 (7th Cir.1995) ; United States v. Villa-Fabela, 882 F.2d 434,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the sentence imposed should be consistent with the protection of the public
B. recognizing prior decision holding that  theft has always been held to involve moral turpitude regardless of the sentence imposed or the amount stolen  quoting soetarto v ins 516 f2d 778 780 7th cir1975
C. recognizing that a criminal prosecution is not complete until a sentence has been imposed
D. recognizing that we review the sentence imposed by a district court under the abuse of discretion standard
E. recognizing constitutional right to be present when sentence is imposed
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.