With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". The latter case is L-1283. There Judge Brown’s order of dismissal referred to the prior opinion of Judge Stanley, saying that no new legal or factual grounds were presented, and also expressed his view against the retro-activity of O’Callahan. Our record initially covered only the latter case, but we have since caused a supplementary record of the pertinent portions of the first proceeding to he incorporated in view of the appeal in both cases. Opportunity was afforded for additional memoranda addressing the supplemental record, but the parties did not find this necessary. The record now covers all the proceedings in both cases except a hearing transcript in the former case. Chief Judge Stanley’s opinion indicates that there were no disputed f 22, 88 S.Ct. 1770, 20 L.Ed.2d 776 (<HOLDING>) ; Smith v. Crouse, Warden, 378 U.S. 584, 84

A: holding no retroactive application
B: holding retroactive application
C: holding that the act is retroactive
D: holding retroactive the rule that persons with conscientious or religious scruples against capital punishment cannot be excluded from juries
D.