With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". contend that the plaintiff is collaterally es-topped from arguing that element of his claim because the state court magistrate found probable cause that the crime was committed at the preliminary examination. Because the charged crime' — drunken driving third offense, see Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.625(9)(c) (“If the violation occurs within 10 years of 2 or more prior convictions, the person is guilty of a felony” and may be imprisoned for one to five years)— was a felony, a preliminary examination was required. See Mich. Comp. Laws § 767.42(1). The purpose of the preliminary examination is to determine whether probable cause exists to believe that an offense has been committed by the defendant. Mich. Ct. R. 6.110; see also People v. Perkins, 468 Mich. 448, 452, 662 N.W.2d 727, 730 (2003) (<HOLDING>). The state magistrate specifically found

A: holding that the officers examination revealed that there was probable cause to believe that the property was stolen
B: holding that the purpose of a preliminary examination is to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and whether there is probable cause to believe that the defendant committed it
C: recognizing that the necessary inquiry  is not whether there was a warrant or whether there was time to get one but whether there was probable cause for the arrest
D: holding that a vehicle may be seized without a warrant if there is probable cause to believe that it is subject to forfeiture
B.