With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". expressly makes cumulative the several punishments. Ex parte Applewhite, 729 S.W.2d 706, 708 (Tex.Crim.App.1987). The terms of any cumu-lation order must be reflected in the judgment. Tex.Code CRIM. PROC. Ann. Art. 42.01 § 1(19) (Vernon Supp.2004). This order must be in writing. See Young v. State, 579 S.W.2d 10 (Tex.Crim.App.1979) (emphasis added). Moreover, when a conflict exists between a trial court’s written order and its oral pronouncement at trial, the written order controls. See Ablon v. State, 537 S.W.2d 267, 269 (Tex.Crim.App.1976) (stating written probation revocation order controlled over court’s oral pronouncement at hearing); Eubanks v. State, 599 S.W.2d 815, 817 (Tex.Crim.App.1980) (same); Hubbard v. State, 896 S.W.2d 359, 361 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); Normand v. State, 686 S.W.2d 275, 277-78

A: holding written judgment must conform to oral pronouncement
B: holding that oral pronouncement prevailed over the written order
C: holding that written judgment controlled over oral pronouncement
D: holding that in cases of direct conflict between a courts oral pronouncement of sentence and the written judgment the oral pronouncement controls
C.