With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 375 F.2d 135, 143-44 (5th Cir.1967) (footnotes and citations omitted). 30 . The diagnoses included "chronic paranoid schizophrenic” (Dr. Kenneth Ritter); “atypical psychosis ... delusional disorder” (Dr. Raphael Salcedo); "psychosis not otherwise specified” with "prominent symptoms of paranoia and persecution” (Dr. Jose Pena); "delusional disorder, persecutory type” (Dr. Guillermo Urrutia); "psychotic disorder similar to schizophrenia” (Dr. Sarah Deland); and "delusional disorder, persecutory type, severe” (Dr. Carlos Kronberger). 31 . Dr. Ritter, Dr. Salcedo, and Dr. Deland were all appointed by the court to the sanity commission. Dr. Carrington was employed by the state as a staff member at FFF. Dr. Pena examined Perez at the request of the FFF staff. 32 . See Brock, 387 F.2d at 258 (<HOLDING>). 33 . Perez, 745 So.2d at 184. 34 . Id. 35 .

A: holding that lay opinion testimony is not admissible when the jury can readily draw the necessary inferences and conclusions without the aid of the opinion
B: holding that a witnesss testimony or an exhibit may not explicitly and directly contain an opinion as to a trial witnesss credibility
C: holding that single lay witnesss testimony was insufficient to rebut the opinion of a skilled and disinterested government psychiatrist which opinion is in no way impugned or discredited
D: holding that witnesss opinion of a persons reaction to hearing a statement was admissible lay testimony based on personal observation
C.