Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
L.Ed.2d 398 (2009) (per curiam) (finding ineffective assistance of counsel at the penalty phase where the lawyer had never represented a defendant in a penalty-phase proceeding before). Here, by contrast, at the time of Petitioner’s trial, defense counsel had served as a public defender for more than ten years, had tried a capital case in the past, and had earned a Level IV ranking in the public defender’s office, meaning that defense counsel was the top trial lawyer in that office. Moreover, the main defense lawyer brought in an assistant to help in both the guilt and penalty phases of the trial. • There, the defense “investigation consisted of at most five interviews,” which took place shortly before jury selection began. Hamilton, 583 F.3d at 1114; see also Porter, 130 S.Ct. at 453 . Here, by contrast, counsel began the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that hiring of only two mental health experts was not deficient
B. recognizing a constitutional right of privacy in mental health records
C. holding that counsel was deficient for failing to obtain any school medical or military records to interview any family members or otherwise to investigate the defendants mental health and background
D. holding that trial counsel did not act unreasonably in failing to raise the issue of the defendants mental health at trial
E. holding that counsels performance was deficient for failing to investigate readily available evidence of mental impairment
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.