With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider it. The criminal rules do not explicitly provide for rehearing or reconsideration of a criminal judgment; however, the Supreme Court has allowed such motions. See United States v. Cook, 670 F.2d 46, 48 (5th Cir.1982) citing United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S. 220, 225, 80 S.Ct. 282, 286, 4 L.Ed.2d 259 (1960) and Browder v. Director, Department of Corrections of Illinois, 434 U.S. 257, 98 S.Ct. 556, 54 L.Ed.2d 521 (1978). These motions are within the district court’s jurisdiction to consider, but only if timely filed. As we stated in Russo, the “motion for reconsideration ... filed over ten days after entry of the order was therefore untimely.” Russo, 760 F.2d at 1230, citing United States v. Cook, 670 F.2d 46, 48 (5th Cir. 1982) (<HOLDING>). In Cook, the Fifth Circuit persuasively held

A: holding that the untimely petition in that case tolled the aedpa statute of limitations
B: holding that untimely petition for postconviction petition divests trial court of jurisdiction
C: holding no court has jurisdiction to hear an untimely pcra petition
D: holding that an untimely petition for a rehearingreconsideration of a motion in a criminal case was beyond the district courts jurisdiction
D.