Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
L.Ed.2d 91 (1976), prohibits the state’s use of the accused’s invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights. The State asked a police detective about a statement Kemp made after his arrest. On cross-examination, Kemp’s counsel asked the police detective about other aspects of Kemp’s statement. During the redirect examination of the police detective, the prosecutor asked Detective Salgado: Q: At some point, sir, in that same conversation with Mr. Kemp, did you.actually come out and ask him questions about the apartment complex parking lot and how Hector Juarez may have gotten in the vehicle with Mr. Kemp. A: Yes, I did. Q: At that point, sir, did Mr. Kemp express reluctance to answer your question about the parking lot? Transcript of June 3,1993, at 87. Kemp’s objection to th 38,1240 (1974) . Likewise, Kemp’s motion for a mistrial was
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that prejudice from question concerning the treatment of defendants found not guilty by reason of insanity to be cured by immediately sustaining objection and by a curative instruction to the jury
B. holding that potential prejudice can be cured by an appropriate iimiting instruction
C. holding that where an objection is sustained and curative instruction given and no further relief such as a mistrial additional curative instruction or striking of the offending comment is requested there is nothing for the appellate court to review
D. holding that any prejudice resulting from a misstatement of the law by the prosecutor was cured by trial courts proper instruction on applicable law
E. holding that prejudice from a question that violated doyle was cured by immediately sustaining objection before the question was answered
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.