Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): violate the rule of Doyle by asking ... improper question^] in the presence of the jury” constitute prosecuto-rial misconduct, and that misconduct warrants reversal where it “may [have] so infec[ted] the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.” Id. at 765, 107 S.Ct. 3102 (citation omitted). Because the district court sustained the Doyle objections, struck the one answer, admonished the jury to disregard that answer, and instructed the jury that “questions ... by lawyers are not evidence” and that “testimony that has been excluded or stricken or that you have been instructed to disregard is not evidence and must not be considered[,]” the prosecutor’s improper questions did not violate Lopez’s due process rights. See id. at 766, 107 S.Ct. 3102 (<HOLDING>). B. Jury Instruction — Burden of Proof Lopez 
 Holding statements: (A) holding there is no meaningful distinction between due course and due process (B) holding that doctrine does not violate due process (C) holding that there is no due process right to appellate review (D) holding that there was no due process violation occasioned by the prosecutors attempt to violate doyle on closely analogous facts (E) holding that in similar factual situation no due process violation occurred
Output (English): holding there is no meaningful distinction between due course and due process