the Hill decision, which completely altered the legal landscape, and since the disclosure
that a new lethal injection protocol has been adopted, Mr. Diaz has NOT had access to
the federal courts.
A wealth of new factual and legal developments have occurred
regarding the constitutionality of the lethal injection protocol that Mr. Diaz has not had
the opportunity to present to the federal courts.
These include the new evidence that has
surfaced regarding the substantial Eighth Amendment problems inherent in the lethal
injection procedures first discussed in THE LANCET article, the litigation in Morales v.
Hickman, and the similar litigation in Ohio federal court, etc. The State’s argument that
Mr. Diaz has had the opportunity to litigate these new facts in light of the new law is
10. Mr. Diaz respectfully requests that this Court allow him the opportunity to
be heard (a basic component of due process) as to the State’s arguments and false
assertions presented in the Response when it contends that this Court does not have
jurisdiction to hear Mr. Diaz’s petition.
Mr. Diaz must be given an opportunity to
respond to the incorrect factual assertions made by Respondent.
11. At its core, due process means that a party has an opportunity to be heard.
In light of the State’s new arguments submitted this morning, Mr. Diaz must be permitted
to file a reply to the State’s Response..
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
EMERGENCY CAPITAL CASE, DEATH WARRANT SIGNED;
EXECUTION SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 13, 2006 AT 6:00 P.M.
ANGEL NIEVES DIAZ,
STATE OF FLORIDA,
MOTION FOR OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD