Marty Testified as a Witness at the Preliminary Hearing in State

Marty testified as a witness at the preliminary hearing in State v. Harris and was subjected to cross-examination by Harris's attorney. Marty died in a car accident 2 weeks before Harris's trial. The prosecution wants to introduce portions of Marty's testimony from the preliminary hearing at Harris's trial. The defense attorney objects. Applying the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Ohio v. Roberts, how will the judge rule on this issue?

A) Marty's testimony is inadmissible as hearsay evidence.
B) Marty's testimony will be admissible since the statement was made under circumstances providing sufficient indicia of reliability that the statement had actually been made.
C) Marty's testimony will be inadmissible because although it meets the Court's test of sufficient indicia of reliability that the stamen was made, it does not meet the Court's requirement that the defense have an opportunity to cross-examine Marty in front of the finder of fact.
D) Marty's testimony will be admissible as having been subject to cross-examination in a previous related legal proceeding, which gives the testimony conclusive proof of Marty's truthfulness.