With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". an appellate court can review for plain error where the record is sufficiently developed. Id. at 10 n. 4. Similarly, in United States v. Hawkins, 249 F.3d 867, 871-72 (9th Cir.2001), although the Ninth Circuit C th Circuit colleagues refused to consider a challenge to a search warrant that was not raised to the district court. 887 F.2d 880, 885-86 (8th Cir.1989) (en banc) (citing Fed.R.Crim.P. 12). The Tenth Circuit Court likewise refused to consider a defendant’s suppression argument that his detention and the search of his car were unconstitutional because he raised the argument for the first time on appeal. United States v. Dirden, 38 F.3d 1131, 1139 n. 10 (10th Cir.1994) (citing Fed.R.Crim.P. 12(b)(3), (f)). But see United States v. Dewitt, 946 F.2d 1497, 1502 (10th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). The Second Circuit Court followed the waiver

A: holding that suppression issue was waived under rule 12 but then noting that the court did not find plain error in the district courts admission of the evidence
B: holding that suppression issue not raised to the district court was waived under rule 12
C: holding that the district court committed plain error by admitting evidence obtained in violation of the fourth amendment where the error did affect a substantial right of the defendants and the admission of evidence which should have been excluded did have a prejudicial impact on the jury
D: holding that the district court did not commit plain error in admitting physical evidence of the defendants prior drug arrest in addition to the fact of the arrest itself when the evidence was relevant under rule 404b and the district court gave a limiting instruction
A.