With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". would result. Id. ¶ 25; see Allison v. United, States, 409 F.2d 445, 451 (D.C.Cir.1969). {9} We have previously considered when it would be appropriate for an appellate court to remand a case for entry of judgment of conviction and resentencing for a lesser-included offense without a new trial. In State v. Haynie, 116 N.M. 746, 748, 867 P.2d 416, 418 (1994), this Court reversed the defendant’s conviction of first-degree murder due to insufficient evidence and remanded for entry of judgment and resentencing for the lesser-included offense of second-degree murder. Id. In deciding whether direct remand is appropriate in these circumstances, we stated the inquiry is whether the interests of justice would be served by ordering a new trial. Compare Haynie, 116 N.M. at 748, 867 P.2d 416 (<HOLDING>), with State v. Garcia, 114 N.M. 269, 276, 837

A: holding that first and seconddegree intentional murder verdicts are consistent with a felony murder verdict because lack of intent is not an element of seconddegree felony murder
B: holding the interests of justice would not be served by remanding for new trial on the offense of seconddegree murder
C: holding that although premeditation is outside the heartland of seconddegree murder guideline upward departure from seconddegree murder guideline based on premeditation was improper because commission considered the defendants state of mind in assigning a higher base offense level to firstdegree murder than to seconddegree murder
D: holding no offense of attempted seconddegree murder where seconddegree murder defined only as unintentional but reckless killing of another under circumstances manifesting indifference to human life
B.