Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Powell’s second trial was for a second crime, separate and distinct from the crime for which he was tried in his first trial. Finally, it is important to note a further state law ground on which this claim founders. The Supreme Court of Virginia correctly found that Powell invited any error that may have been committed by the trial court in this regard. See Powell, 590 S.E.2d at 559-60. It was Powell who chose to disclose to the potential jurors that he had been previously convicted of capital murder. Hence, under the doctrine of “invited error,” Powell may not contend that potential jurors were tainted by their knowledge of his prior conviction when he is the one who disclosed the prior conviction to them. See Saunders v. Commonwealth, 211 Va. 399, 177 S.E.2d 637, 638 (1970) ; see also United States v. Collins, 372 F.3d
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that no exception to the invited error doctrine has ever been adopted by this circuit
B. holding that invited error does not entitle the defendant to any relief and of which he will not be heard to complain on appeal
C. holding that an appellant is not permitted to rely on invited error on appeal
D. holding that a court will not notice error which has been invited by the party seeking to take advantage thereof on appeal
E. holding that appellate review is precluded when the error is invited
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.