You will be given a definition of a task first, then some input of the task.
In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision.  Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.

commission of ... unlawful distributing or dispensing of controlled dangerous substances.... Second degree felony murder occurs when a person engages in the commission of any felony other than the unlawful acts set out in section 701.7(B) which results in death. 21 O.S.1991, § 701.8(2). Because unlawful distribution of a controlled dangerous substance is an enumerated felony for first degree felony murder, it cannot serve as the basis for a second degree felony murder charge. Id. Therefore, the State cannot charge McCann or anyone else with second degree felony murder if the underlying felony is unlawful distribution of a controlled dangerous substance. This does not mean that the State cannot charge McCann with second degree depraved mind murder. See Palmer v. State, 871 P.2d at 433 (<HOLDING>). The State’s choices are to charge McCann with 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that simple possession is not a lesserincluded offense of distribution of a controlled substance (B) holding different rule applicable for conviction of second degree murder (C) holding that instructions on depraved mind murder were correctly refused when the defendant shot the victim a second time in the chest at close range (D) holding distribution of a controlled dangerous substance which results in death can constitute second degree depraved mind murder (E) holding that states pretrial amendment of the original indictment charging defendant with willful and deliberate first degree murder to add an alternative murder theory of depraved mind murder did not add a different offense and therefore did not prejudice the defendant
Output:
(D)