With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". appeal waiver is invalid. Having reviewed the record and found no waiver of appellate rights in the plea agreement, we address the merits and affirm. The district court did not clearly err in departing under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(b)(l) from a Category IV criminal history to a Category III (as opposed to Nunez’s requested Category II), see United States v. Greger, 339 F.3d 666, 670 (8th Cir.2003) (standard of review); and did not err in counting the prior DWI convictions, see U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2, comment, (n.2) (sentence of probation is to be treated as sentence under § 4Al.l(c) (add 1 point for prior sentence not counted in (a) or (b)) unless condition of probation required imprisonment of at least 60 days); United States v. Nichols, 511 U.S. 738, 746-47, 114 S.Ct. 1921, 128 L.Ed.2d 745 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Having reviewed the record independently

A: holding that prison term following revocation of probation is a modification and part of the actual sentence imposed for the original offense
B: holding that forfeiture is an element of the sentence imposed following conviction
C: holding an uncounseled misdemeanor conviction is valid because no prison term was imposed and the conviction may be used to enhance a sentence for a subsequent offense
D: holding that uncounseled conviction could not be considered by court in sentencing defendant after subsequent conviction
C.