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. You should write an incorrect option. Even though there exist multiple wrong answers, we only need a single wrong answer. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
Q: modify or revoke a defendant's term of supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. 3583(e) (1993). Although Congress has amended various provisions of 3583, including 3583(e), since 1993, those changes do not have a substantive impact on our discussion here, and the district court's authority to terminate, modify or revoke a term of supervised release under 3583(e) remains essentially the same under the current statute. In addition to their authority over the term of supervised release, district courts continue to have the authority to modify, reduce or enlarge the conditions of supervised release at any time prior to the expiration or termination of a defendant's term of supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(2); United States v. Navarro-Espinosa, 30 F.3d 1169, 1171 (9th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Allen, 2 F.3d 538, 539-40
Holding statements: (A) holding that modification of original sentence occurred outside the sevenday window and the district court lacked jurisdiction to act pursuant to rule 35c (B) holding the district courts revocation of defendants term of supervised release did not end the courts jurisdiction over defendants release (C) holding that 3583e2 allows a district court to modify the conditions of supervised release without extending the term of that release (D) holding that further supervised release may be ordered as a sentence for violation of supervised release (E) holding that even if the district court lacked jurisdiction to correct a defendants sentence under fedrcrimp 35c 3583e2 authorized the court to modify the conditions of a defendants supervised release
A:
holding that modification of original sentence occurred outside the sevenday window and the district court lacked jurisdiction to act pursuant to rule 35c