With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Hart points to two remarks, one from the prosecutor’s closing argument, the other from the prosecutor’s rebuttal closing. In his brief, Hart quotes the first challenged remark: This whole thing about the Defendant intending to kill himself has been a false issue that’s just been kind of floating around out there throughout. What the Defendant’s actions were all about weren’t about suicide. * ⅜ ⅞ ⅜ But the bottom line is it doesn’t really matter what his intention was, whether he was intending at that time to kill himself. What matters is that he committed an aggravated assault. [¶ 12] Appellant contends the prosecutor’s remark was a gross misstatement of the law because intent does matter, even if the crime is a general intent crime. See Cox v. State, 829 P.2d 1183, 1185-86 (Wyo.1992) (<HOLDING>); accord Streitmatter v. State, 981 P.2d 921,

A: holding that duress is a defense available in new mexico except when the crime charged is a homicide or a crime requiring intent to kill
B: holding that wyo stat ann  62502aiii defines a general intent crime
C: holding that attempted sexual abuse is a specific intent crime
D: recognizing general rule
B.