With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 16-88-108(c), this court held: “The offense of kidnapping in this case occurred in Jefferson County and culminated in the aggravated robbery of the victim in Pulaski County. Under these facts, Jefferson County had jurisdiction to try the petitioner for both offenses.” Id. at 73, 722 S.W.2d at 576 (citing Cozzaglio v. State, 289 Ark. 33, 709 S.W.2d 70 (1986)). The facts in Cozzaglio, 289 Ark. 33, 709 S.W.2d 70, upon which this court relied in Ellis, were similar to those in the present case. There, the kidnapping occurred in Washington County, continued into Madison County, and culminated with the victim’s rape in Madison County. The defendant was tried and convicted of the kidnapping in Washington County, and then tried and convicted of the rape in Madison County. On appeal, the 1987) (<HOLDING>); Bottom v. State, 155 Ark. 113, 244 S.W. 334

A: holding that both saline county and grant county had jurisdiction to try the appellant for murder where the actual killing occurred in one county but the acts requisite to the consummation of the murder and the subsequent disposal of the body occurred in the other county
B: holding that the grant county prosecutor had a statutory duty to be legal advisor to the county clerk even though she was not embroiled in litigation in which the county was the real party in interest
C: holding that where the murder and robbery occurred in one county but the plan was hatched in another county and the body was subsequently returned to that other county both counties had jurisdiction to try the appellant
D: recognizing county officers as  those whose general authority and jurisdiction are confined within the limits of the county in which they are appointed who are appointed in and for a particular county and whose duties apply only to that county and through whom the county performs its usual political functions
C.