With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". memorandum of plea agreement filed in this case. Upon our careful review of the record we find no term, either express or implied, such as alleged by Nosa. To the contrary, the written guilty plea expressly states that “no one has made any promises or inducements to make me plead guilty, nor has anyone threatened me to cause me to plead guilty.” The relevant record thus contains and consists of Nosa’s own assertion that no promises or inducements led to his guilty plea, and thus his bare allegation to the contrary neither meets a minimum threshold of credibility nor overcomes the presumption the record truly reflects the facts. Therefore, and assuming Nosa has preserved error on this claim, we find it to be without merit. See, e.g., Foster v. State, 395 N.W.2d 637, 638 (Iowa 1986) (<HOLDING>); State v. Boge, 252 N.W.2d 411, 414 (Iowa

A: holding that a ground for relief not pled in a motion for postconviction relief is waived and cannot be raised on appeal
B: holding no evidentiary hearing was required where the affidavits of the defendant and his wife were directly contradicted by the defendants sworn testimony during the plea hearing
C: holding applicant for postconviction relief not entitled to hearing where allegation directly contradicted record and minimum threshold of credibility not met
D: holding that postconviction allegations directly refuted by the trial record are without merit
C.