With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". was an on duty police officer; and (2) Petitioner had a significant history of violent felony convictions. The jury found no mitigating circumstances. Because the jury found at least one aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstances, the jury was required to impose the death penalty in accordance with the Pennsylvania capital sentencing statute. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9711(c)(l)(iv). 2 . At this stage, the Pennsylvania Superior Court reversed and vacated the death sentence because the prosecutor's argument violated Caldwell v. Mississippi, 472 U.S. 320, 105 S.Ct. 2633, 86 L.Ed.2d 231 (1985). Caldwell set forth a standard for determining when remarks about the appellate process, made during the penalty phase in a capital case, constitute reversible error. Id. at 328, 105 S.Ct. 2633 (<HOLDING>). The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the

A: holding that if a trial court has rejected death as a possible sentence double jeopardy bars the state from seeking the death penalty at resentencing even where rejection of the death sentence was based on a legal error
B: holding that a death sentence for a conviction for the rape of a child where the crime did not result and was not intended to result in death of the victim was barred by the eighth amendment
C: holding it is constitutionally impermissible to rest a death sentence on a determination made by a sentencer who has been led to believe that the responsibility for determining the appropriateness of the defendants death rests elsewhere
D: holding that a jury cannot be led to believe that they do not possess responsibility for deciding the appropriateness of the death penalty
C.