With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 1045, 1054-55 (Colo.1984); People v. Bartowsheski, 661 P.2d 235, 245-47 (Colo.1983). In Issue 143, Rodriguez contends that his convictions for the underlying felonies merge into his conviction for felony murder. In light of the district court’s vacation of Rodriguez’ felony murder conviction and our affir-mance of that vacation, Issue 143 is rendered moot. See supra part XIV. In Issue 144, Rodriguez argues that his first-degree sexual assault conviction merged into his second-degree kidnapping conviction because “[o]ne of the essential elements of the second degree kidnapping allegation ... was that the victim was sexually assaulted.” Rodriguez’ Opening Brief at 393. We have held that convictions for kidnapping and for sexual assault do not merge. See Henderson, 810 P.2d at 1063-64 (<HOLDING>). We conclude that Rodriguez’ convictions for

A: holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse  and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse
B: holding evidence of sexual assault relevant to show defendants motive in kidnapping victim
C: holding that merger did not apply because sexual assault was not a lesser included offense of seconddegree kidnapping involving sexual assault
D: holding unlawful restraint an included offense of aggravated criminal sexual assault so conviction on the former was vacated
C.