Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
48 L.Ed.2d 126 (1976), to support the conclusion that Anderson was denied a fair trial. Anderson, 574 So.2d at 93-94. The district court concluded the Florida Supreme Court’s denial of relief as to this claim was not “contrary to” or “an unreasonable application of ... clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” See id. § 2254(d)(1). Jurists of reason would not debate the correctness of the district court’s conclusion. In Estelle, the Supreme Court held that a defendant’s presumption of innocence is undermined and his right to a fair trial violated when the state compels him to stand trial in prison or jail clothing. 425 U.S. at 504-06, 512, 96 S.Ct. at 1692-94, 1697; see also United States v. Harris, 703 F.2d 508, 509-11 (11th Cir.1983) . As we explained in United States v.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the jurors failure to remember particular facts inquired about on voir dire and the jurors misunderstanding of voir dire questions do not constitute probable prejudice
B. holding a record reflecting that the applicable range of punishment was discussed during voir dire is enough to dispel a claim that appellants substantial rights were violated
C. holding no violation of substantial rights occurred during voir dire where record did not show that defendant was denied fair and impartial trial
D. holding that defendants have a right to be present at voir dire
E. holding a defendants due process rights were violated where he was compelled to wear prison clothing during jury voir dire
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.