With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in capital sentencing). 16 . See United States v. Higgs, 353 F.3d 281, 324 (4th Cir.2003) (stating that under plain error standard of review "[i]t is far from clear that the Confrontation Clause applies to a capital sentencing proceeding”) (citing United States v. Terry, 916 F.2d 157, 160-61 (4th Cir.1990), for the proposition that "United States courts have a long history of using reliable hearsay for sentencing” and a "trial court may properly consider uncorroborated hearsay evidence that the defendant has had an opportunity to rebut or explain”). 17 . See Mempa v. Rhay, 389 U.S. 128, 134, 137, 88 S.Ct. 254, 19 L.Ed.2d 336 (1967) (stating that the right is applicable at sentencing in general); Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 686-87, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (<HOLDING>). 18 . See Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S.

A: holding that the right applies at capital sentencing in particular
B: holding that apprendi does not apply to capital sentencing schemes
C: holding teague applies to capital cases
D: holding that the right to crossexamine adverse witnesses applies to capital sentencing hearings
A.