With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". for appointment of counsel prior to April 24, 1996, AEDPA’s effective date, his petition was pending on that date. The Sixth Circuit rejected this argument in Williams v. Coyle, 167 F.3d 1036 (6th Cir.1999). Wickline's argument that the Sixth Circuit’s reasoning in Williams has been overruled by a subsequent Supreme Court case, Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000), was rejected in a recent Sixth Circuit death penalty case, Cooey v. Coyle, 289 F.3d 882 (6th Cir.2002), petition for cert. filed (U.S. Sept. 24, 2002) (No. 92-212). Accordingly, this court will follow Williams and apply AEDPA to Wickline's habeas corpus petition. See also Martin v. Mitchell, 280 F.3d 594, 602 (6th Cir.2002), cert. denied,-U.S. --, 123 S.Ct. 515, 154 L.Ed.2d 401 (2002) (<HOLDING>). 2 . First, the court must determine whether

A: holding that the aedpa applies to those habeas corpus petitions filed after its effective date of april 24 1996
B: holding vcaa generally applicable to claims filed before november 9 2000 but not finally decided as of that date
C: holding that notice of appeal was not effectively taken where appeal was filed simultaneously with timely motion for reconsideration because when timely motion for reconsideration is filed a notice of appeal filed prior to disposition of the motion to reconsider has no effect
D: holding aedpa applicable when petition was filed in june 1996 but motion to stay execution was filed in november 1995
D.