With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". contingencies that might arise.” ’ Fearson v. State, 662 So.2d 1225, 1226 (Ala.Cr.App. 1995) (quoting Minnifield v. State, 439 So.2d 190, 192 (Ala.Cr.App.1983) (‘[w]e do not consider that ineligibility to earn CIT [Correctional Incentive Time] is a direct consequence of a guilty plea as to which a defendant must be advised before entering a plea’)); Oyekoya v. State, 558 So.2d 990, 991 (Ala.Cr.App.1989) (“‘[W]e hold that potential deportation is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea. Accordingly, we find no error in the sentencing court’s failure to inform Romero-Vilca in the Rule 11 Colloquy of his possible deportation.” ’) (quoting United States v. Romero-Vilca, 850 F.2d 177, 179 (3d Cir.1988)); Minnifield v. State, 439 So.2d 190, 192 (Ala.Cr.App.1983).” Danzey, 703 So.2d at 1020 (<HOLDING>). Although this court recognized just a few

A: holding that being subjected to dna testing was a collateral consequence of conviction having no bearing on defendants sentence so that he was not entitled to be informed of dna testing before pleading guilty
B: holding that potential civil commitment under a state statute was a collateral consequence of pleading guilty
C: holding that the court had no duty to warn defendants about the possibility of deportation as a collateral consequence of conviction
D: holding that the sanction of deportation is a collateral not direct consequence of a guilty plea
A.