Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
F.3d 1008, 1011 (8th Cir. 2012). Parker did not advance the procedural error argument before the district court, and we therefore review it for plain error. Miller, 557 F.3d at 916. Having reviewed the sentencing transcript, we find no plain error in the district court’s consideration of the statutory factors or explanation of its sentence. The district court announced that it had considered the factors, and the colloquy with defense counsel indicated the district court was thinking about Parker’s specific history and characteristics. The court had detailed information regarding Parker’s history of supervision, criminal history, original offense of conviction, and the numerous violations of supervised release conditions. See United States v. Robinson, 516 F.3d 716, 718 (8th Cir. 2008) . Nor is Parker’s within-Guidelines-range
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that appellate review is precluded when the error is invited
B. holding that an appellate court may review the entire record to determine whether hearsay statements are sufficiently reliable
C. holding that there is no due process right to appellate review
D. holding that the context for appellate review is the entire sentencing rec ord
E. holding that an appellate court cannot consider an issue that was not preserved for appellate review
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.