With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". and May 20, 1993. Dr. Dennis reached the same conclusion as Dr. Dalton, stating that “[claimant] injured back lifting heavy engine blocks in the shop.” Finally, in his statement to an insurance representative, claimant mentioned that he had back problems originating with on-the-job bending and squatting. Claimant also stated that when he installed a transmission during the week preced ing November 13, 1992, he experienced pain in his back and testified to this fact at the deputy commissioner’s hearing. Claimant filed a claim for workers’ compensation benefits on October 7, 1993. The deputy commissioner heard 426, 399 S.E.2d 630, 634 (1990) (stating that hearsay evidence is admissible before the commission); Franklin Mtg. Corp. v. Walker, 5 Va.App. 95, 99, 360 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1987) (<HOLDING>), aff'd en banc, 6 Va.App. 108, 367 S.E.2d 191

A: holding that victims statements were hearsay admissible under the state of mind exception to the hearsay rule and constitutionally permissible under ohio v roberts citations omitted
B: holding corroboration of named informants statements some of which included suspects hearsay enhanced informants reliability
C: holding florida drivers handbook hearsay and not within any recognized exception to hearsay rule
D: recognizing the permissible use of hearsay without corroboration
D.