With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that reason, we now hold that neither the prosecutor, defense counsel, nor the court may make any comment about the consequences of a particular verdict at any time during a criminal trial.”); State v. Okie, 987 A.2d 495, 497-500 (Me.2010); People v. Goad, 421 Mich. 20, 364 N.W.2d 584, 589-90 (1984) (not requiring the instruction because it would be impossible to fully explain the "consequences” of an NGRI verdict because they are contingent on future events); State v. Bott, 310 Minn. 331, 246 N.W.2d 48, 52-53 (1976); Emanuel v. State, 412 So.2d 1187, 1190 (Miss.1982); State v. Buckman, 193 Mont. 145, 630 P.2d 743, 748 (1981); State v. Ryan, 233 Neb. 74, 444 N.W.2d 610, 631-32 (1989); Neely, 819 P.2d at 256-57 (due process did not require a consequence instruction) d 419, 426 (1980) (<HOLDING>); State v. McDonald, 89 Wash.2d 256, 571 P.2d

A: holding that when no objection was made to jury instruction evidence to support finding based on instruction should be assessed in light of the instruction given
B: holding that a consequence instruction was properly refused
C: holding a consequence instruction is not necessary because the consequences of the verdict have no bearing upon the guilt or innocence of the defendant
D: holding that defendant was not entitled to entrapment instruction when there was insufficient evidence to support such an instruction
B.