RICHARD L HOLCOMB (HI Bar No.

9177) Holcomb Law, A Limited Liability Law Corporation 1136 Union Mall, Suite 808 Honolulu, HI 96813 Telephone: (808) 545-4040 Facsimile: (808) 356-1954 Email: rholcomblaw@live.com ALAN BECK (HI Bar No. 9145) Attorney at Law 4780 Governor Drive San Diego, California 92122 Telephone: (619) 971-0414 Email: ngord2000@yahoo.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Christopher Baker

UNITED STATE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH CIRCUIT

CHRISTOPHER BAKER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) ) LOUIS KEALOHA, as an individual and ) in his official capacity; ) CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU; ) ) Defendants. ) ________________________________ ) __________________________________

No. 12-16258 CASE NO. CV 11-00528 NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY

Notice of Supplemental Authority COMES NOW THE APPELLANT, submits this Notice of Supplemental Authority. It cites Moore v. Madigan, Nos. 12-1269, 12-1788 ( 7th Circuit Dec. 11th, 2012) (attached).and support for his standing. The need for defense of self, family, and property is most acute in the home, id. at 3036 (emphasis added); 554 U.S. at 628, but that doesnt mean it is not acute outside the home. Heller repeatedly invokes a broader Second Amendment right than the right to have a gun in ones home, as when it says that the amendment guarantee[s] the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. 554 U.S. at 592. Confrontations are not limited to the home. A right to bear arms thus implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home. Slip Op at 4,5.

Hawaii has a functional ban as it does not issue permits. See ER 94-105. Alongside Kachalsky v. Westchester, No. 11-3642, 2012 WL 5907502 (2d Cir. Nov. 27, 2012) stating [t]he plain text of the Second Amendment does not limit the right to bear arms to the home, *5 n.10, the Amendment must have some application in the . . . context of public possession, *5, the lower courts ruling cannot stand, it was predicated there being no right to bear arms outside the home.

At the pleading stage, general factual allegations of injury suffice we presume that general allegations embrace those specific facts that are necessary to support the claim. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992). Would-be purchasers of an item have standing to challenge a law that restricts the items sale.. See Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976), beer sellers and underage persons (who would otherwise consummate beer transactions) had standing to challenge a drinking-age law that restricted the sale of 3.2% beer. Id. at 197; see also Bryant v. Yellen, 447 U.S. 352, 366-67 (1980) (plaintiffs would purchase land but for acreage limitation); Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 262-63 (1977) (plaintiff had contract to purchase property that was contingent on repeal of zoning law).

Respectfully submitted this 11th day of December, 2012 s/ Alan Beck_________________________ Alan Beck (HI Bar No. 9145) The body of this notice contains 350 words.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE On this, the 11th day of December, 2012, I served the foregoing Notice of Supplemental Authority by electronically filing it with the Courts CM/ECF system, which generated a Notice of Filing and effects service upon counsel for all parties in the case. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this the 11th day of December, 2012.

s/ Alan Beck_________________________ Alan Beck (HI Bar No. 9145)