Did the state post-conviction court misapply this Court's Sixth Amendment precedent when it held that Mikal Mahdi's trial attorneys reasonably ended their investigation into mitigating evidence

QUESTION PRESENTED Mikal Mahdi lived through extreme trauma as a child. His mother abandoned him at the age of five to the father who viciously beat her. Mikal was hospitalized with a mental health crisis at age nine. By the age of ten, his father began “homeschooling” Mikal in political paranoia, and taught him how to shoot and wield knives to protect himself from white people. Then, between the ages of fourteen and twenty-one, Mikal was incarcerated for 85% of his life, with minimal mental health care, where he was also tasered, shot with rubber bullets, and called “camel monkey” and “towelhead” by guards. The charged crimes followed just two months after his release from these brutal conditions. Despite having two retained investigators and a broad outline of their client’s upbringing, Mikal Mahdi’ trial counsel abandoned their inquiry into his background after determining that his family was uncooperative. Counsel made virtually no effort to identify available teachers and community witnesses who could describe Mikal’s harrowing life. As a result, the sentencing judge received a mere fifteen transcript pages of testimony about Mikal. The question presented is: 1. Did the state post-conviction court misapply this Court’s Sixth Amendment precedent when it held that Mikal Mahdi’s trial attorneys reasonably ended their investigation into mitigating evidence.