With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in his direct appeal. See Commonwealth v. Foster, 960 A.2d 160 (Pa.Super.2008). Before reaching those merits, however, the Superior Court determined that it was required first to analyze whether Appellee’s challenge was properly before it, as Appellee had failed to file post-sentence motions concerning his “Dickson challenge” with the trial court. See Commonwealth v. Shugars, 895 A.2d 1270 (Pa.Super.2006) (averments of sentencing error are generally waived if not raised, in the first instance, in a motion before the sentencing court). Moreover, Appellee apparently did not set forth a statement of reasons relied upon for allowance of appeal in his principal brief to the Superior Court pursuant to Pa. R.A.P. 2119(f). See Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508, 522 A.2d 17 (1987) (<HOLDING>). However, the court also considered this

A: holding that failure to file a rule 2119f statement generally constitutes waiver of all discretionary sentencing issues
B: holding that failure to brief an argument constitutes waiver
C: holding that the failure to object to an instruction constitutes a waiver of error
D: holding a failure to appear for sentencing constitutes an escape under the rule
A.