Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
ha-beas relief unless the state court’s decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States,” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1), or “was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding,” id. § 2254(d)(2). B. Analysis Mr. Morehead argued in his § 2254 application that his conviction violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights based on “the suppression of evidence [Ms. Burbach’s academic records] which would have revealed perjury to the jury.” Aplt. App. at 10. He contended the suppression was contrary to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and its progeny, which hold due .2012) . Moreover, Mr. Morehead does not contest the
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding claims not raised in  2254 application are forfeited
B. holding that a coa is required to appeal the denial of a rule 60b motion from a judgment in a  2254 proceeding
C. holding a coa applicant forfeited a claim of error in district courts failure to hold an evidentiary hearing by not seeking a hearing in his  2254 proceeding
D. holding that defendants waived any challenge to the trial courts failure to hold an evidentiary hearing
E. holding that the magistrates recommended order terminating temporary supervision and placing the child in permanent guardianship was not supported by competent substantial evidence because the magistrate failed to hold an evidentiary hearing and that the failure to hold an evidentiary hearing violated the fathers due process rights
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.