540
Scalia, J., dissenting
" 'Q You got the Social Service records? " 'A That is what I recall. " 'Q That was in the Social Service records?
" 'A Yes.
" 'Q So you knew that?
" 'A Yes. " 'Q You also knew that where [sic] were reports of sexual abuse at one of his foster homes?
" 'A Yes.
" 'Q Okay. You also knew that he had had his hands burned as a child as a result of his mother's abuse of him?
" 'A Yes. " 'Q You also knew about homosexual overtures made toward him by his Job Corp supervisor?
" 'A Yes. " 'Q And you also knew that he was borderline mentally retarded?
" 'A Yes.
" 'Q You knew all— " 'A At least I knew that as it was reported in other people's reports, yes.
" 'Q But you knew it?
" 'A Yes.' " App. 490-491.
In light of this testimony, the Maryland Court of Appeals found that "counsel did investigate and were aware of [Wig-gins'] background," Wiggins v. State, 352 Md. 580, 610, 724 A. 2d, 1, 16 (1999) (emphasis in original), and, specifically, that "[c]ounsel were aware that [Wiggins] had a most unfortunate childhood," id., at 608, 724 A. 2d, at 15. These state-court determinations of factual issues are binding on federal habeas courts, including this Court, unless rebutted by clear
Page: Index Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007