This edition of "Petitions to Watch" features cases up for consideration at the Justices"™ next private conference on Friday, December 4.  As always, it lists the petitions on the Court"™s paid docket that Tom has deemed to have a reasonable chance of being granted.  Links to all previous editions are available in our SCOTUSwiki archive.

Docket: 08-1332; 08-1472
Title: USA Mobility Wireless, Inc. v. Quon; USA Mobility Wireless, Inc. v. Quon
Issues: 08-1332: (1) Whether a SWAT team member has a reasonable expectation of privacy in text messages transmitted on his SWAT pager, where the police department has an official no-privacy policy but a non-policymaking lieutenant announced an informal policy of allowing some personal use of the pagers; (2) Whether individuals who send text messages to a SWAT team member"™s SWAT pager have a reasonable expectation that their messages will be free from review by the recipient"™s government employer.

08-1472: Whether a service provider is liable as a matter of law under the Stored Communications Act for disclosing to a subscriber of the service the contents of communications stored on the provider"™s computers, without the consent of the sender or recipient of the message.

Docket: 09-274
Title: Ryan v. Scott
Issues: (1) Can the application of a state procedural rule be characterized as “inadequate” under the adequate-state-ground doctrine–and therefore unenforceable on federal habeas corpus review–based upon one Arizona appellate case that involved the application of a different rule to different factual and procedural circumstances? (2) Can a federal habeas court refuse to consider a state"™s procedural requirement that issues
be raised in the body of a brief, rather than in an appendix, in determining whether a petitioner has fairly presented his claims to the state"™s courts?

Docket: 09-395
Title: Ricci v. Kamienski
Issues: What is the standard of review for a federal appellate court analyzing a sufficiency-of-evidence claim in a habeas petition under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. §2254(d)(1)?

Posted in Everything Else