With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 2002, orig. proceeding) (noting, in discussing whether petitions defective for not including certain information, that “[t]he signatures on Morales’ and on Vera’s petitions could be readily verified by checking the voter registration records for Dawson County”). Once Peoples had obtained such conclusive, public-record evidence of the invalidity of the signatures, she had a ministerial duty to reject the application. See Tex. Elec.Code Ann. § 141.065(b); cf. Tex. Elec.Code Ann. § 145.003(f)(2) (West 2010) (providing candidate may not be certified for placement on ballot if facts indicating ineligibility are conclusively established by another public record); Hayes v. Harris Cnty. Democratic Exec. Comm., 563 S.W.2d 884, 885 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1978, orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of

A: recognizing a nonresident who receives the most votes for elected office does not hold the office but not discussing the de facto officer doctrine
B: holding chair has ministerial duty not to certify candidate if another public record conclusively proves facts showing ineligibility to hold office
C: recognizing that a prosecutors office is an entity and that information in the possession of one attorney in the office must be attributed to the office as a whole
D: holding that any impairment of candidates and voters first amendment interests was not sufficiently grievous to invalidate louisiana statute requiring judge to resign office before becoming candidate for nonjudicial office
B.