FOR A WRIT OF
certiorari to review
the United States Court
the Ninth Circuit
The Court of Appeals decision for which review is soughtis non-published and affirmed the District Court
s denial of
motion to preliminarily enjoin the enforcementof 13-2921 and his motion for partial summary judgmentrequesting a declaration that 13-2921 is unconstitutional.
This matter arose as an appeal of a final order denying a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of 13-2921 and denying a requested declaration that 13-2921 isunconstitutional on its face. Huminski timely filed amotion for rehearing
on August 23, 2013 whichwas denied on October 21, 2013 by the Ninth Circuit.Jurisdiction is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1254.
The vague and overbroad plain language of 13-2921 isat odds with the First Amendment and Due Process. U.S.Const., Amend. I, XIV Furthermore, 13-2921criminalizes and, thus chills expression protected under the First Amendment.
Huminski, formerly a resident of Arizona, was subjectto a communication from the City of Surprise PoliceDepartment to not have contact with two persons pursuantto 13-2921. Huminski filed suit against the SurpriseDefendants and requested injunctive and declaratory relief concerning 13-2921. The District Court denied the relief requested concerning 13-2921 and the Ninth Circuitaffirmed.
Compounding the unconstitutional plain language of 13-2921 is the fact that the police communication invoking13-2921 occurred the day before a civil hearing where