Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
(same). In this case, as in OBert, there was no question that Rasanen’s excessive force claim had to proceed to the jury. Brown claimed that he shot Rasanen while struggling to regain control of his own gun after Rasanen had lunged at the officer and Brown felt his gun pointed against him. Such a scenario plainly demonstrated “probable cause to believe that the suspect pose[d] a threat of serious physical harm.” Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. at 11, 105 S.Ct. 1694; see generally Florida v. Harris, — U.S. —, 133 S.Ct. 1050, 1055, 185 L.Ed.2d 61 (2013) (describing probable cause as “practical,” “common-sensical,” “all-things considered” standard for assessing probabilities in particular factual context); Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 231-32, 238, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983) . Plaintiff never contended otherwise. Instead,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing probable cause as fluid standard that does not demand hard certainties but only the sort of fair probability on which reasonable and prudent men not legal technicians act
B. holding that probable cause inquiry is whether considering totality of the circumstances there is a fair probability that contraband  will be found in a particular place
C. holding that police officers had probable cause to arrest a suspect where the facts suggest a fair probability that the suspect has committed a crime
D. holding that probable cause does not demand any showing that such a belief be correct or more likely true than false
E. holding that new york law reasonable cause standard is equivalent to fourth amendments probable cause standard
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.