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.

to sustain a conviction on each offense." Thomas v. State, 277 Md. 257, 262, 353 A.2d 240, 244 (1976). For d stribute and possession are the same offense, we must next determine if retrial for the same offense is barred by double jeopardy. The double jeopardy prohibition against retrial for the same offense attaches in a jury trial when the jury is empaneled and sworn. See Illinois v. Somerville, 410 U.S. 458, 467, 93 S.Ct. 1066, 1072, 35 L.Ed.2d 425, 433 (1973); Blondes v. State, 273 Md. 435, 444, 330 A.2d 169, 173 (1975). Thus, after jeopardy attaches, retrial is barred if a mistrial is declared without the defendant's consent unless there is a showing of "manifest necessity" to declare the mistrial. See United States v. Perez, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 579, 580, 6 L.Ed. 165, 165 (1824) (<HOLDING>). Although there is no clear test to determine
Holding statements: (A) holding that the trial court can and should grant a new trial if the manifest weight of the evidence is contrary to the verdict (B) holding that once the defendant is before the court the court will not inquire into the circumstances surrounding his presence there (C) holding that adverse credibility determinations under the real id act must take into consideration the individual circumstances of the applicant (D) holding that the trial court was not authorized to dismiss misdemeanor charges without the states consent on the basis that the state had refused to consent to fishers waiver of a jury trial (E) holding that a trial court may discharge a jury without the defendants consent whenever taking all the circumstances into consideration there is a manifest necessity for the act
Output:
(E)