With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". expunge his arrest record. The Jefferson Circuit Court denied Slaton’s amended motion on July 20, 2010. On July 27, 2010, Slaton appealed to the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals. On September 13, 2010, that court, citing Ex parte Teasley, 967 So.2d 732 (Ala.Crim.App.2007), for the proposition that this court has jurisdiction over appeals from orders denying the expungement of criminal records, transferred Slaton’s appeal to this court. The facts material to this appeal are not in dispute, and we are presented with a pure question of law. Therefore, our re view is de novo. See Boutwell v. State, 988 So.2d 1015, 1020 (Ala.2007). Slaton concedes that § 41-9-646, Ala. Code 1975, does not authorize the ex-pungement of his arrest record. See State v. Blane, 985 So.2d 384, 387-88 (Ala.2007) (<HOLDING>); see also Jackson v. State, 993 So.2d 491, 492

A: holding that the appellants claim that the circuit court erred in failing to make specific findings of fact as to all claims in the appellants rule 32 petition was not preserved for review because the appellant did not first present the claim to the circuit court
B: holding that when the district court improperly purported to transfer to the circuit court an action over which the circuit court lacked subjectmatter jurisdiction the circuit court was without jurisdiction to enter its judgment which was void and dismissing the appeal from that void judgment
C: holding that  419646 authorizes a circuit court to make criminal records accurate if they are inaccurate but does not authorize a circuit court to expunge them
D: holding that once circuit court is put on notice of a discovery violation circuit court is obligated to conduct a richardson inquiry to determine prejudicial affect if any of violation
C.