Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
See Lantzy, 558 Pa. at 228, 736 A.2d at 572-73. The order of the Superior Court is reversed, and the case is remanded for reinstatement of Appellant’s entitlement to pursue a direct appeal. 1 . The traditional requirements for relief pertaining to claims of ineffective assistance of counsel mandate that the petitioner establish actual prejudice (in terms of undermining confidence in the outcome of his trial), as well as the arguable merit of the underlying claim and an absence of some reasonable strategy on counsel’s part in terms of the act or omission resulting in the underlying claim not having been previously advanced or vindicated. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Pierce, 515 Pa. 153, 158-60, 527 A.2d 973, 975-77 (1987). 2 . On consideration of an order denying post-convictio 994) ; Bonneau v. United States, 961 F.2d 17, 23
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the complete denial of counsel on direct appeal requires a finding of prejudice
B. recognizing the right to counsel on appeal
C. holding that a notice of appeal filed when an appeal bond is required to perfect is a bona fide attempt to invoke appellate jurisdiction and that the court of appeals dismissal was improper without first affording an opportunity to correct the defective perfection of appeal
D. holding that prejudice should be presumed where counsel filed notice of appeal but failed to perfect the direct appeal
E. holding that where counsel has failed to file or perfect an appeal despite the defendants request it is clear that the defendant need not demonstrate that but for the ineffectiveness of counsel such an appeal would have succeeded or even would have merit
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.