Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
J. The Florida Parole Commission (“Parole Commission”) issued an order revoking Robert B. Olsen’s (“Olsen”) parole. Thereafter, Olsen filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court, seeking review of the Parole Commission’s order. The circuit court entered an order denying Olsen’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, and Olsen then appealed the circuit court’s order to this Court. Because the circuit court’s review of the Parole Commission’s quasi-judicial action is the equivalent of an appeal, plenary appeal to a district court to review the merits of the circuit court’s order is not authorized. See Sheley v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 720 So.2d 216, 217 (Fla.1998) . We, therefore, treat Olsen’s notice of appeal
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the action of denying parole is not an adjudication subject to judicial review
B. holding that after an inmate has been afforded judicial review of the parole commissions actions a second opportunity for judicial review on the merits by plenary appeal from a circuit courts order would improperly provide the inmate with a second full bite at the apple in the district court
C. holding that the petitioner could demonstrate its constitutional standing for the first time on judicial review of an order of the land use board of appeals because the need to do so first arose when the petitioner sought to invoke the courts jurisdiction on judicial review
D. holding that because here the statutes in issue provide for judicial review via citizen suit provisions yet do not set forth a standard for that review judicial review is limited to apa review on the administrative record
E. holding the commissions order reversing an award and remanding the case to the single commissioner to take further testimony was not final and not appealable to the circuit court until the commissions final determination regarding the single commissioners award the court construed the language in a provision of the code that states appeals from the commission to the circuit court shall be under the same terms and conditions as govern appeals in ordinary civil actions  and stated an appeal to the circuit court will not lie from an interlocutory order of the commission unless it affects the merits citation omitted
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.