With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". need not establish the precise time of an accident or of the defendant’s driving to prove the offense of driving while intoxicated.”) (citing Kuciemba, 310 S.W.3d at 462, Kennemur v. State, 280 S.W.3d 305, 314 n. 8 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2008, pet. ref d), and Zavala, 89 S.W.3d at 1 t he had been drinking with a family member before he left the house to drive back to his hotel. Appellant told Officer Slight that he had consumed one margarita and three glasses of wine before driving away from his relative’s home. See Zavala, 89 S.W.3d at 137-38 (considering appellant’s extrajudicial statement to police in determining evidence was sufficient to support DWI conviction when sufficient evidence corroborated appellant’s statement) (citing Self v. State, 513 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Tex.Crim.App.1974) (<HOLDING>)). Viewing all of the evidence in the light

A: holding that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to review the weight of evidence  
B: holding that confession may be used to aid in establishment of corpus delicti if there is some evidence corroborating it
C: holding that it may not
D: holding that managing conservator while in texas to seek return of child by writ of habeas corpus may not be served with civil process and is subject to jurisdiction of court in which habeas corpus is pending and only for purpose of prosecuting writ of habeas corpus
B.