With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". disc. review denied, 357 N.C. 64, 579 S.E.2d 396, cert. denied, 540 U.S. 928, 124 S. Ct. 338, 157 L. Ed. 2d 231 (2003). Therefor 32 L. Ed. 2d 845 (1995). None of the foregoing cases, however, dealt with a failure of subject matter jurisdiction. If this were a case of first impression with us, we might be inclined to agree with the State that the defendant should not be allowed to obtain relief from a judgment entered upon an improper offense which his own counsel requested. It seems to us that affording a defendant relief under such circumstances might encourage the bad faith trial tactic of urging the submission of improper lesser offenses at trial in the hopes of obtaining appellate relief predicated on invited error. See Shepherd v. State, 459 S.E.2d 608, 609 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995) (<HOLDING>); Kemp v. State, 647 N.E.2d 1143, 1145-46 (Ind.

A: holding that aggravated battery is a lesser included offense of manslaughter
B: holding that the offense of sexual battery requires the state prove the victims lack of consent regardless of the victims age and charge the jury on the same
C: holding that battery is an inherently included offense of aggravated battery
D: holding that the defendant could be convicted of sexual battery a lesser crime not included in the offense for which he was indicted where the defendant requested that sexual battery be submitted to the jury
D.