With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". election errors are subject to a constitutional harmless error analysis. See State v. Qualls, 482 S.W.3d 1, 18-20 (Tenn.2016) (applying constitutional harmless error analysis to assess election error); State v. Rodriguez, 254 S.W.3d 361, 371 (Tenn.2008) (“The test used to determine whether a non-structural constitutional error is harmless is whether it appears beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.” (internal citation and quotation marks omitted)). The Court of Criminal Appeals held in this case that, “[bjased upon the indictment and the State’s closing argument, the Defendant’s right to a unanimous jury verdict was not violated.” Smith, 2014 WL 3954062, at *6. Specifically, WL 1580662, at *10 (Tenn.Crim.App. July 15, 2004)(<HOLDING>). . We ' hold that the notion that a

A: holding that any error was harmless when prosecutor stated in closing argument that the state was electing a specific incident the victim had testified to with particularity
B: holding that it was harmless error when the prosecutor focused on a single incident in closing argument
C: holding that plainerror exception did not apply where prosecutor asked jury to assume the role of the victim in closing argument
D: holding that any error was harmless and thus not plain error
A.