Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
not determine whether counsel’s investigation into mitigating evidence in Lee’s case constituted deficient performance under the first prong of Strickland, because, even assuming the habeas court correctly concluded that counsel’s failure to investigate and present the habeas testimony of Lee’s childhood history of abuse and neglect constituted deficient performance, we conclude as a matter of law that Lee has not shown prejudice sufficient to warrant success of his overall ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See Strickland v. Washington, supra, 466 U. S. at 697 (“If it is easier to dispose of an ineffectiveness claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, . . . that course should be followed.”). See also Schofield v. Holsey, 281 Ga. 809 (II), n. 1 (642 SE2d 56) (2007) . 4. Actual prejudice. To determine prejudice
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the combined effect of trial counsels deficiencies should be considered in weighing prejudice
B. holding that the cumulative impact of multiple deficiencies in defense counsels performance prejudiced the defendant in a capital trial
C. holding that maryland law prohibits use of combined reporting
D. holding that the combined effect of trial counsels various professional deficiencies should be considered
E. holding that the combined effect of trial counsels errors should be considered
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.