Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510, 31 (2003)

Page:   Index   Previous  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  Next

540

WIGGINS v. SMITH

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  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007