Detailed Instructions: 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.
Q: minimum period of incarceration. Id. at 142-43, 417 A.2d 1075. Simply put, the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice (Code), N.J.S.A. 2C:1 to :104-9, does not permit convicted murderers to receive any sentence less than thirty years of incarceration. In addition, an examination of the legislative history behind the statute undeniably indicates that anyone not sentenced to death for a murder conviction must serve thirty years of incarceration prior to release. When enacting N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3b, the Legislature made it plain that convicted murderers would have to remain in prison for a minimum of t .2d 1144 (1991) (explaining that a “sentence of thirty years without parole [is] required for murder under N.J.S.A. 2C:11 — 3”); State v. Rodriguez, 97 N.J. 263, 274 n. 4, 478 A.2d 408 (1984) (<HOLDING>); State v. Johnson, 206 N.J.Super. 341, 343, 
 Holding statements: (A) holding where the statutory minimum sentence exceeds the guidelines sentence a substantialassistance downward departure begins at the mandatory minimum sentence (B) holding that njsa 2c113b requires a minimum sentence of thirty years without parole eligibility (C) holding that purported calculation error in mandatory minimum was harmless because challenged sentence was 60 months longer than presumed minimum and was imposed according to guidelines without reference to statutory minimum (D) holding defendant did not show required prejudice from counsels alleged failure to advise him about eligibility for parole under the sentence agreed to in the plea bargain (E) holding that defendant has due process right to introduce evidence on minimum parole eligibility in sentencing phase
A:
(B)