With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". was multiplieitous, any prejudice Petitioner may have suffered was cured when the Arizona Court of Appeals vacated Petitioner’s conviction and sentence on conspiracy to commit escape. See, United States v. Davenport, 519 F.3d 940 (9th Cir.2008) (finding that offense of possessing child pornography was lesser included offense of receipt of child pornography, and thus entering judgment against defendant on separate counts for receiving child pornography and possessing child pornography was multiplieitous, in violation of Fifth Amendment’s prohibition of double jeopardy and remanding to the district court to vacate defendant’s conviction on one of the two counts and allowing that it be reinstated without prejudice if his other conviction should be overturned on h Cir.1978) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). • In this case, the Court of Appeals found

A: holding that severance was not required when a defendant was charged with five counts of forcible rape two counts of felonious restraint three counts of kidnapping two counts of armed criminal action two counts of forcible sodomy one count of second degree assault one count of first degree robbery and one count of stealing
B: holding that convictions for the crimes of conspiracy and continuing criminal enterprise violate double jeopardy
C: holding that issues underlying all counts were sufficiently intertwined that the separate appeal of the summary judgment counts would complicate the trial of the remaining counts
D: holding that consecutive sentences imposed on multiplieitous counts  two counts of conspiracy for one drug smuggling enterprise  violated double jeopardy clause
D.