Must a court consider prevailing professional norms when determining whether a life history investigation was 'thorough?

Question Presented No. 1 The district court found that the jury would have spared Kemp’s life had it known the full circumstances of his “horrible” upbringing. The Eighth Circuit did not disagree. Yet that court found trial counsel’s mitigation investigation—the sum total of which consisted of four witness interviews and collection of a set of school records—to be “thorough.” In finding that counsel’s performance was constitutionally sufficient, the Eighth Circuit ignored voluminous evidence showing that the mitigation investigation fell short of prevailing professional standards during the 1990s, when this case was tried. The question presented is: Must a court consider prevailing professional norms when determining whether a life history investigation was “thorough”? Question Presented No. 2 Was an appeal warranted on the district court’s procedural rulings which faulted Kemp for the late development of his Brady/Napue claims when the State had hidden the necessary facts in a “work product” file first disclosed through discovery in federal habeas? i