With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". victim’s] use [of drugs distributed by the defendant] is a but-for cause of the death or injury.” Burrage, 571 U.S. at -, 134 S.Ct. at 892. To the extent Ragland argues his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to challenge then-controlling circuit precedent regarding the enhanced penalty provision of § 841(b)(1)(C), we deny the motion. See Burrage, 571 U.S. at-,-, 134 S.Ct. at 886, 892 (abrogating United States v. Monnier, 412 F.3d 859, 862 (8th Cir.2005), and United States v. McIntosh, 236 F.3d 968, 972-73 (8th Cir.2001)). Our cases make clear that counsel’s failure “to anticipate a change in the law” “does not constitute ineffective assistance.” Parker v. Bowersox, 188 F.3d 923, 929 (8th Cir.1999); accord Brown v. United States, 311 F.3d 875, 878 (8th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Ragland has not “made a substantial

A: holding counsels decision not to raise an issue unsupported by thenexisting precedent did not constitute ineffective assistance
B: holding that the failure to raise a futile issue does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel
C: holding that counsels decision not to argue the absurd or burden the jury with the obvious did not amount to ineffective assistance
D: holding that defendant may raise claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal only if ineffective assistance is conclusive from the record
A.