With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". during and in relation to a drug offense, and two counts of possession with intent to distribute. Petitioner has filed this section 2255 motion, requesting that this court vacate his § 924(e)(1) conviction. Petitioner bases his motion on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bailey v. United States, — U.S. -, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472 (1995), which requires the Government to prove “active employment” of a firearm to sustain a conviction under the use prong of section 924(c). Petitioner does not challenge his § 841(a) conviction. Both parties are in agreement that the § 924(c)(1) conviction must be vacated, in light of Bailey. Accordingly, this court will grant petitioner’s motion. B. Resentencing The parties disagree over whether this court may resentence petitioner on E.D.Ark.1996) (<HOLDING>), with Merritt v. United States, 930 F.Supp.

A: holding that constitution and courts limited jurisdiction preclude twolevel increase on resentencing
B: holding resentencing is not always required
C: holding that resentencing is required
D: holding that on direct appeal appellate court may remand for resentencing of all counts
A.