Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
regarding Appellant’s sores. Without objection, Officer Meyer testified: that upon pulling her over, he noticed her hand shaking; that her behavior was “unusual”; that after obtaining her consent to search the car, he found a glass pipe with off-white residue; that upon her arrest he found another glass pipe in the trunk of Appellant’s car; and that upon a subsequent search, he found two small baggies containing a crystalline residue. This testimony, along with the items themselves and a lab report properly admitted into evidence, also establish the same essential fact as the testimony regarding Appellant’s sores — that Appellant used methamphetamine. The testimony regarding Appellant’s sores was, therefore, not prejudicial. See State v. Ponder, 950 S.W.2d 900, 910 (Mo.App. S.D.1997) . Point I is denied. Point II Appellant’s
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding admission of challenged evidence is harmless error where the record contains other properly admitted evidence that independently establishes guilt
B. holding improperly admitted evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt
C. holding that admission of evidence is harmless if it is cumulative to other legitimately admitted evidence that establishes a defendants guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
D. holding that if evidence is improperly admitted but other evidence establishes essentially the same facts there is no prejudice to the accused and no reversible error
E. holding improperly admitted evidence may be harmless if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming and the error is insignificant by comparison
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.