Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
been informed of the registration requirement in order for his admission to have been valid. “For a guilty plea to be valid, it must be affirmatively shown that it was both intelligently and voluntarily given, and made with a full understanding both of what the plea connotes and of its possible consequences.” In re John D., 479 A.2d 1173, 1177 (R.I.1984) (citing Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242-44, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 1712, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, 279-80 (1969)). Before accepting a plea, the court must set forth, in language understandable to the juvenile, the “essential elements underlying certain rights.” In re John D., 479 A.2d at 1178. However, the court need not inform a defendant of collateral consequences of an admission for it to be valid. State v. Figueroa, 639 A.2d 495, 499 (R.I.1994) . Matthew argues that the state’s case is moot
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the sanction of deportation is a collateral not direct consequence of a guilty plea
B. holding that deportation is collateral consequence and deportations admonishments are not constitutionally required
C. holding that the court had no duty to warn defendants about the possibility of deportation as a collateral consequence of conviction
D. holding that potential civil commitment under a state statute was a collateral consequence of pleading guilty
E. holding that enhancement of sentence after violation of probation was collateral rather than direct consequence of plea
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.