Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
6 Yates v. Brown, 235 Ga. 391, 392 (1) (219 SE2d 729) (1975). 7 Bryant v. State, 174 Ga. App. 522 (1) (330 SE2d 743) (1985). 8 Kraus v. State, 161 Ga. App. 739, n. 1 (289 SE2d 555) (1982). 9 Mohamed v. State, 289 Ga. App. 394, 395 (657 SE2d 307) (2008). 10 Hall v. State, 271 Ga. App. 302, 303 (609 SE2d 653) (2004). 11 Moore v. Caldwell, 231 Ga. 485 (1) (202 SE2d 425) (1973). 12 Brown v. Ricketts, 235 Ga. 29, 32 (218 SE2d 785) (1975). 13 Blassingame v. State, 155 Ga. App. 235, 236 (270 SE2d 399) (1980). 14 Blaylock v. State, 129 Ga. App. 230 (199 SE2d 369) (1973). 15 It is for this reason that any failure by counsel to assert such rights on behalf of a fugitive client cannot constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. See Johnson v. Smith, 227 Ga. 611 (2) (182 SE2d 101) (1971) . See also Johnson v. Caldwell, 458 F2d 505
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the strickland test applies to claims  that counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to file a notice of appeal
B. holding that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel could not be resolved on the facts appearing in the record and that under such circumstances the defendants remedy is to file a petition for habeas corpus
C. holding that failure to file brief on appeal to bia constitutes ineffective assistance but affirming the denial of habeas because petitioner could not show prejudice
D. holding on appeal from a habeas corpus denial that counsel was not ineffective for failure to file a notice of appeal because of defendants escape
E. holding in context of sixth amendment ineffective assistance of counsel based on asserted failure of counsel to file appeal established prejudice per se for purpose of establishing habeas review jurisdiction as if proven such failure constitutes denial of a fundamental constitutional right
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.