With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". we have jurisdiction over the appeal from that order and vacate it because the legislature has specified that such registration orders must be entered at the time of sentencing. 1 . Serrano still may seek relief pursuant to Rule 32.1(f), Ariz. R.Crim. P. See State v. Whitman, 684 Ariz. Adv. Rep. 7, n. 2, 234 Ariz. 565, 324 P.3d 851, 2014 WL 1385396 (Ariz. Apr. 9, 2014). 2 . The terms of § 13-3821 do not prohibit a trial court from requiring sex offender registration following a suspended sentence and revocation of probation, and we do not address that situation here. Similarly, this case does not concern registration of a juvenile offender, for whom the statute prescribes different procedures. See § 13-3821(D); In re Javier B„ 230 Ariz. 100, ¶ 1, 280 P.3d 644, 645 (App.2012) (<HOLDING>). 3 . The current language in § 13 — 4033(A)(3)

A: holding that an order was interlocutory in nature despite the trial courts certification of the order as a final appealable judgment
B: holding that there can be only one final appealable order
C: holding an order imposing sex offender registration after the juvenile courts initial disposition can be a final appealable order
D: holding because an initial order contemplated the subsequent entry of a judgment the initial order was not considered a final adjudication
C.