With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". § 9543.1. Thus, under Section 9543.1(a): The statute sets forth several threshold requirements to obtain DNA testing: (1) the evidence specified must be available for testing on the date of the motion; (2) if the evidence was discovered prior to the applicant’s conviction, it was not already DNA tested because (a) technology for testing did not exist at the time of the applicant’s trial; (b) the applicant’s counsel did not request testing in a case that went to verdict before January 1, 1995; or (c) counsel sought funds from the court to pay for the testing because his client was indigent, and the court refused the request despite the . client’s indigency. B. Williams, supra at 49 (citing 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 9543.1(a)(2)). See also Commonwealth v. Perry, 959 A.2d 932 (Pa.Super.2008) (<HOLDING>). Additionally: The text of the statute set

A: holding pcra counsel was not ineffective for declining to pursue postconviction dna testing where technology for testing existed at time of trial verdict came after january 1 1995 and court had not refused request for funds for testing consequently appellant could not have met his threshold burden under section 95431a2
B: holding that no  1983 claim exists for injunctive relief to compel dna testing
C: holding that there is no postconviction due process right to biological evidence for purposes of dna testing
D: holding that trial delay for dna testing was attributable to the state but was mere negligence
A.