With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". The evidence viewed most favorably to the State showed that the victim was transported by automobile for several miles into the countryside to detain her in isolation and in secret, where she was subjected to various acts of sexual abuse. Id. at 736, 740. The detention lasted for over two hours. Id. at 740. Because we concluded that the State offered sufficient evidence to support a kidnapping conviction even under the incidental approach, we did not expressly decide the issue in that case. Id. 3 . In Hardin, 359 N.W.2d at 189-90, we we 88 (1981) (noting merger of crimes has no application to a situation in which no conviction was obtained on the ficient, often on the grounds that the movement made the crime easier to commit or made detection less likely. See Faison, 426 So.2d at 966 (<HOLDING>); State v. Key, 180 N.C.App. 286, 636 S.E.2d

A: holding movement from kitchen to bedroom by substantial force made rapes easier to commit and reduced the danger of detection even though only short distance involved
B: holding force to be an element of pre1994 amendment  111 which may be satisfied by proof of force or threat of force
C: holding that because the crime of rape involved a nonconsensual act there was a substantial risk that physical force may be used in committing the offense
D: holding that substantial evidence of rape may be found even though there was only a hearsay statement of the child victim
A.