Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
beyond a reasonable doubt. See id. We suspect Knight’s multiple attempts to obtain relief on this claim stem from a mistaken belief that such an error is, or was at one time, per se reversible. The supreme court, however, has never held that it is. In the absence of such a declaration by the supreme court, all judgments are subject to a harmless error analysis. See § 924.33, Fla. Stat. (1993); State v. Schopp, 653 So.2d 1016, 1020 (Fla.1995); State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, 1134 (Fla.1986). Knight likely was misled because until recently the supreme court had not discussed the harmless error test in any of its decisions reversing an improper firearm enhancement. See, e.g., Tripp, 642 So.2d at 728; State v. Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385 (Fla.1984). A reversal without a discussion of wh ) ; State v. Overfelt, 457 So.2d 1385, 1387
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that even where evidence regarding the use of a firearm is unrebutted to impose mandatory minimum sentence a jury must make that finding
B. holding that even if the minimum mandatory exceeds the statutory maximum the court must impose the minimum mandatory
C. holding that even where the evidence is uncontroverted to sentence a defendant to a minimum mandatory sentence for trafficking the jury must make express findings of the amount of cocaine involved
D. holding that the trial court was not entitled to impose a threeyear mandatory minimum sentence on a defendant convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon where the jury verdict did not specifically find actual possession
E. holding that to enhance a sentence because of the defendants use of a firearm the jury must find the defendant guilty of a crime involving a firearm or otherwise specifically find that a firearm was used
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.