With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". The State correctly asserts that Helms still controls the appealability of nonnegotiated pleas of guilty. See King v. State, 687 S.W.2d 762, 765 (Tex. Crim.App.1985); Lynch v. State, 903 S.W.2d 115, 118 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). The Helms rule provides that where a guilty plea is entered and there is no plea bargain, any nonjurisdictional error occurring before the entry of the plea is waived. See Lynch, 903 S.W.2d at 116. However, there is no jurisdictional bar to appealing matters following a nonnegotiated guilty plea. See Jack v. State, 871 S.W.2d 741, 744 (Tex.Crim.App.1994). The alleged error in this case occurred at the sentencing hearing nearly three months after appellant pleaded guilty. Consequently, we must address the merits of appellant’s point of error. See id. (<HOLDING>). WAS APPELLANT’S TESTIMONY AT THE PUNISHMENT

A: holding that appeal of order became moot when order was complied with and court of appeals was notified and that court of appeals erred in issuing advisory opinion on merits of appeal
B: holding court of appeals erred in not reaching merits of appellants contention that court improperly admitted evidence of unadjudicated extraneous offenses at sentencing hearing after open plea
C: holding that disputes as to evidence admitted at a restitution hearing are meritless because the rules of evidence do not apply during sentencing proceedings
D: recognizing that all evidence admitted during merits phase of a contested trial can be considered in sentencing
B.