With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". citation omitted). Addressing the Florida sentencing guidelines, the Court noted that the amendment at issue disadvantaged the petitioner; it then commented that “[cjonsidering the revised guidelines law as a whole” did not change the result because the State was unable “to identify any feature of the revised guidelines law that could be considered ameliorative.” Miller, 482 U.S. at 431-32,107 S.Ct. at 2451-52 (emphasis added); see also Dobbert v. Florida, 432 U.S. 282, 294, 97 S.Ct. 2290, 2298-99, 53 L.Ed.2d 344 (1977) (noting that, in evaluating an ex post facto claim, the Court “must compare the two statutory procedures in toto to determine if the new may be fairly characterized as more onerous”); cf. Weaver v. Graham, 450 U.S. 24, 34-36, 101 S.Ct. 960, 967-68, 67 L.Ed.2d 17 (1981) (<HOLDING>). The decisions therefore make clear that

A: holding that collection notice was potentially misleading because least sophisticated consumer could conclude that total amount stated as due was due at any time when in fact it was increasing
B: holding that statutory good time credits must be calculated under the law in effect at the time of resentencing after an appeal of the sentence is determined
C: holding that statutory provision that reduced retroactively amount of good time reduction to prisoners sentences was not saved by potentially ameliorative provisions enacted at the same time because their application was purely discretionary
D: holding that a provision of the constitution is to be construed in the sense in which it was understood by the framers and the people at the time of its adoption but that if new products or circumstances that did not exist at the time the constitutional provision was enacted fall within the meaning of the provision the constitutional provision applies to them
C.