With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". The State argues, however, that because the instruction later states that the State was required to prove “[t]hat the conduct was a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of murder: that is the knowing and intentional killing of another human being,” id. (emphasis added), the earlier error was cured and Carter was not prejudiced as a result. It is well established, however, that a correct jury instruction does not cure an erroneous one: “[T]his court has repeatedly enunciated the rule that the error of a bad instruction is not cured by the giving of correct instructions on the same subject. Such instructions are not viewed as a whole, with this court on appeal left to determine which of the contradictory instructions the jury should reasonably have believed.” FMC Corp 83) (<HOLDING>); Barnes v. State, 435 N.E.2d 235, 242

A: holding that any prejudice resulting from a misstatement of the law by the prosecutor was cured by trial courts proper instruction on applicable law
B: holding thatany error made by the state in its election of offenses was cured during the prosecutors closing argument emphasis added
C: holding almost any improper argument may be cured by an instruction to disregard
D: holding that any misstatements of law during closing argument are presumed cured by final instruction
D.