With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". State v. Neri 593 A.2d 953, 956 (R.I.1991). In the case at hand, when counsel for DCYF moved that exhibits 1 and 2 be admitted into evidence as full exhibits, counsel for Mr. Patino stated his objection as follows: “I guess I’d object to the reports, your Honor, since the witness [Dr. Barron] is here to testify.” The trial justice overruled Mr. Patino’s counsel’s stated objection, and exhibits 1 and 2 were then admitted into evidence as full exhibits. In arguing on appeal that exhibits 1 and 2 should not have been admitted into evidence, Mr. Patino relies on th been admitted as full exhibits when respondent’s counsel at a later point in time raised a hearsay objection with respect to those exhibits, that hearsay objection was untimely and therefore waived. See Brown, 9 A.3d at 1245 (<HOLDING>). In view of the clear language of Rule

A: holding that the defendants objection did not suggest that the objected to statement was hearsay and therefore concluding that the defendant waived appellate review of the hearsay argument
B: holding that the defendants objection was untimely and thus waived because the evidence to which he objected had already been presented to the jury
C: holding that appellant had waived any objection to an instruction that he had himself introduced and which was amended by the state without objection from appellant
D: holding a party failed to preserve an objection to the jury instructions where the party objected prior to the court instructing the jury but not after
B.