With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". remedy of coram nobis is a viable means for challenging criminal convictions. It may be used when no other remedy is available, but may not be used to supplant relief through direct appeal, post-judgment motion or PCR petition. ¶ 17. Applying this principle to defendant’s situation, we conclude that defendant was eligible to file a PCR petition and thus precluded from seeking relief through coram nobis. A person “who is in custody under sentence” may bring a PCR petition “to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.” 13 V.S.A. § 7131. A person is “in custody” for purposes of the PCR statute if he is serving a sentence enhanced by the challenged conviction. In re Stewart, 140 Vt. 351, 359-60, 438 A.2d 1106, 1109 (1981); see State v. Boskind, 174 Vt. 184, 192, 807 A.2d 358, 365 (2002) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 18. Thus, although defendant is no longer

A: holding that due to statute defendant cannot collaterally attack prior convictions used to enhance sentence unless in violation of the right to counsel
B: holding that where defendants seek to challenge predicate convictions used to enhance current sentence proper avenue for relief is through pcr proceeding
C: holding that prior felony drug convictions that fall within the conspiracy period may be used to enhance the defendants sentence if the conspiracy continued after his earlier convictions were final
D: holding that  5g13c applied where defendants undischarged sentence resulted from multiple convictions only one of which was used to enhance his instant sentence
B.