With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". testified at the evidentiary hearing that he had resided at the same residence for the past fifteen years: 1712 26th Street in Orlando, Florida. This address matched the address listed for Coleman on the State’s witness list. Nevertheless, Corporal Payne testified that she was unable to locate Coleman at the address Richards gave her. Buttressing Payne’s 3 F.2d 250 (11th Cir.1987); Monfiston v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corr., 559 Fed.Appx. 863, 868 (11th Cir.2014) (concluding that for the petitioner to show that he was prejudiced by counsel’s alleged deficiency to investigate the witness, he had to rebut by clear and convincing evidence the state postconviction court’s finding that the witness was unavailable to testify at trial); Gideon v. Dep’t of Corr., 295 Fed.Appx. 988, 990 (11th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>); see also Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579, 583

A: holding that in order to state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel based on the failure to call a witness to testify the claimant must allege 1 the identity of the potential witness 2 that the witness was available to testify at trial 3 the substance of the witnesss testimony and 4 an explanation of how the omission of the testimony prejudiced the case
B: holding that a 3851 claim of ineffective assistance was legally insufficient where the motion did not allege the specific facts to which the witness would testify and how the lack of testimony prejudiced the case
C: holding that the state courts determination that the petitioner could not show prejudice because he did not allege that the witness was available to testify was a reasonable application of federal law to the facts of the case
D: holding that the plaintiff has not raised a colorable claim that he was denied procedural due process because he did not allege that the available state remedies are constitutionally inadequate
C.