With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". for any PCRA hearing whatsoever. The PCRA court denied this request in its opinion, dated April 6, 1998, stating: There is no legal basis for this court to accept the record of the federal habeas corpus hearing as the record of this PCRA proceeding.... The federal record would not remove the need for a PCRA hearing under Pa.R.Crim.P. 1508. It appears that the Commonwealth might not have presented a full defense on the merits in light of its legal argument on nonexhaustion. Finally a resolution of the many issues of fact raised in the pleadings require[s] the kind of credibility assessments that only a hearing can provide. (See PCRA Court Opinion, dated April 6, 1998, at 21). 10 . Only a few other jurisdictions have considered this issue. See Seals v. State, 23 S.W.3d 272 (Tenn.2000) (<HOLDING>); Cochran v. State, 133 Idaho 205, 984 P.2d 128

A: holding statute of limitations for filing petition for postconviction relief not tolled by general savings statute tolling limited to reasons enumerated in state postconviction relief act
B: holding that the oneyear statute of limitations was not tolled during the pendency of petition for certiorari to the united states supreme court seeking review of denial of state postconviction relief
C: holding that probation was custody and permitted jurisdiction under postconviction relief statute
D: holding that a ground for relief not pled in a motion for postconviction relief is waived and cannot be raised on appeal
A.