With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (1999). A jury must find the existence of at least one statutory aggravating factor before it can even consider proposed non-statutory factors, a prosecutor can only argue those nonstatutory aggravating factors for which the defendant has been given prior notice, a nonstatutory aggravating factor itself must conform with due process jurisprudence, and a district judge is required to screen out any irrelevant and unduly prejudicial information a prosecutor may try to introduce to the jury in order to prove a nonstatutory aggravating factor. Id. at 240. We agree with the Fifth Circuit that these limitations provide intelligible principles which constrain a prosecutor’s discretion such that the delegation is not unconstitutional. United States v. Paul, 217 F.3d 989, 1003 (8th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); See also United States v. Tipton, 90 F.3d

A: recognizing the delegation of authority to the united states attorneys
B: recognizing in the psc context that a legislative delegation of power to a legislative or executive agency permitting an agency to declare what the law is violates floridas separation of powers doctrine
C: recognizing that there is an outer limit to congresss power under the commerce clause
D: holding that the prosecutors authority to define nonstatutory aggravating factors is a constitutional delegation of congresss legislative power
D.