With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 506, 510, 115 S. Ct. 2310, 132 L. Ed. 2d 444 (1995)). Although the right to a jury trial and the prosecution’s burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt are “constitutional protections of surpassing importance,” Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 476, the Supreme Court has decided that these protections do not apply to determining the existence of prior convictions. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 239, 118 S. Ct. 1219, 140 L. Ed. 2d 350 (1998); see also Apprendi, 530 U.S. at 490 (“Other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” (emphasis added)); United States v. O’Brien,_U.S._, 130 S. Ct. 2169, 2174, 176 L. Ed. 2d 979 (2010) (<HOLDING>). ¶45 Our Supreme Court continues to follow

A: holding that apprendi carved out an exception for prior convictions that specifically preserved the holding of almendareztorres
B: recognizing exception carved out by almendareztorres
C: recognizing the prior conviction exception of almendareztorres
D: recognizing the narrow exception created by almendareztorres but noting that it was not directly at issue in alleyne
B.