With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 556 F.2d 1242, 1245 (5th Cir.1977); United States v. Davis, 546 F.2d 583, 594, 595 n. 31 (5th Cir.1977). The Fifth Circuit has noted that “[e]ven in eases where it was held that a Doyle problem resulted in reversible error, there has sometimes been reference made to the fact that error therein was not harmless because the evidence was not overwhelming.” Stone, 556 F.2d at 1245 (citing United States ex rel. Ross v. Fike, 534 F.2d 731, 734 (7th Cir.1976); United States v. Impson, 531 F.2d 274, 278-79 (5th Cir.1976)). ¶ 12. This Court has held that even errors involving a violation of an accused’s constitutional rights may be deemed harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the weight of the evidence against the accused is overwhelming. Kircher v. State, 753 So.2d 1017, 1027 (Miss.1999) (<HOLDING>). See also DeLoach v. State, 722 So.2d 512, 520

A: holding harmless any error in admitting accuseds confession despite accuseds complaint that confession was given involuntarily
B: holding that question of whether a confession was coerced was not to be resolved by considering the truth or falsity of the confession
C: holding introduction of actually coerced confession constitutes reversible error even where confession was cumulative in nature
D: holding that under elstad the first question that must be answered when determining whether a subsequent confession is tainted by an earlier confession is whether the initial confession was obtained in violation of the defendants fifth amendment rights  ie whether it was involuntary  or whether the confession was voluntary but obtained in technical violation of miranda
A.