With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". have withheld information regarding CI-1 and CI-2, and the failure to disclose such information meant that the Wiretap Evidence should have been suppressed. The Government’s withholding of the information, Fermin argued, violated his right to the effective assistance of counsel, and his right to receive material exculpatory and impeachment evidence as guaranteed by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), and its progeny. Judge Mukasey denied his § 2255 petition as time barred. Because Fermin’s judgments of conviction became final before the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), Judge Mukasey found that Fermin should have filed his petition by April 24, 1997. See Mickens v. United States, 148 F.3d 145 (2d Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). Judge Mukasey did, however, vacate Fermin’s

A: holding that  2254 petitions of prisoners whose convictions became final before the passage of the aedpa are timely if filed within one year from the aedpas effective date
B: holding that petitioners whose convictions became final before the enactment of aedpa had a oneyear grace period after aedpas effective date to file their federal habeas petitions
C: holding that habeas petitions challenging judgments of conviction that became final before the effective date of the aedpa are not time barred if filed within one year from aedpas effective date april 241996
D: holding that the aedpa applies to those habeas corpus petitions filed after its effective date of april 24 1996
C.