With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". ORDER Defendant-Appellant Montaque Green (“Green”) pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 841(b)(1)(A)(iii). The District Court sentenced Green principally to 120 months’ imprisonment. Green appeals his sentence, arguing that the District Court erred at his sentencing by not applying the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub.L. No. 111-220, 124 Stat. 2372 (“FSA”). See Dorsey v. United States, — U.S. —, 132 S.Ct. 2821, 2335, 183 L.Ed.2d 250 (2012) (<HOLDING>). The government concedes that the District

A: holding descamps and mathis divisibility analysis applies in immigration proceedings nationwide to the same extent that it applies in criminal sentencing proceedings
B: holding  2254 applies to administrative proceedings
C: holding that the confrontation clause applies equally to sentencing proceedings tried to a jury
D: holding that the fsa applies to sentencing proceedings occurring after august 3 2010
D.