With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". after the entry of the final judgment in this case. D. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, we grant the petition in part and issue a writ of mandamus to the Jefferson Juvenile Court to vacate its September 4, 2015, order to the extent that it modified custody of the child. The petition is denied in all other respects. PETITION GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; WRIT ISSUED. THOMPSON, P.J., and DONALDSON, J., concur. PITTMAN, J., concurs in the rationale in part and concurs in the result, with writing. THOMAS, J., dissents, with writing. PITTMAN, Judge, concurring in the rationale in part and concurring in the result. I concur in parts II and III of the main opinion. As to part I, however, I concur in the result on the authority of Muellen v. Ritter, 96 So.3d 863, 866 (Ala.Civ.App.2012) (<HOLDING>), and the absence of any provision in Rule 21

A: holding federal sentencing guidelines are subject to jury trial requirements of sixth amendment
B: holding failure to preserve issues below results in waiver even of constitutional issues
C: holding that even petitions presenting subjectmatterjurisdiction issues are subject to the presumptivelyreasonabletime requirements of rule 21a3 ala rapp p
D: holding that nonmonetary claims are not subject to these requirements
C.