With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". then the jury should find him guilty of “felony murder.” Appellant contends that the references to malice and malice aforethought were error, because they served only to confuse the jury. The trial court should not have made those references, but we see no reversible error. The trial court did not instruct the jury on “malice murder” or ever use that term; it accurately instructed the jury on the principles of felony murder based on the predicate felony of armed robbery; it explained that the State had the burden to prove every material allegation of the indictment and every essential element of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt; and it provided the jury with the indictment. Any error was therefore cured. See Sharpe v. State, 291 Ga. 148, 151 (728 SE2d 217) (2012) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, if anything, the court’s

A: holdingthat an error in instructing the jury that an offense could be committed by a statutory method not charged in the indictment is cured where  the court provides the jury with the indictment and instructs jurors that the burden of proof rests upon the state to prove every material allegation of the indictment and every essential element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt  citation omitted
B: holding that prior convictions relevant only to the sentencing of an offender found guilty of the charged crime do not need to be charged in an indictment or proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt
C: holding that an indictment gave sufficient notice when the indictment charged the elements of the offense
D: holding that an allegation as to the time of the offense is not an essential element of the offense charged in the indictment and within reasonable time limits proof of any date before the return of the indictment and within the statute of limitations is sufficient
A.