Mr. Lightbourne had yet to receive a service copy via facsimile as certified by Respondents.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

NO. SC06-2391

IAN DECO LIGHTBOURNE,

Petitioner,

v.

BILL McCOLLUM, ET AL.,

Respondents.

__________________________/

MOTION FOR OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD

COMES NOW, IAN DECO LIGHTBOURNE, Petitioner, by and through
undersigned counsel and moves this Court to allow him the
opportunity to be heard and as grounds therefore asserts:

1. On August 9, 2007, Petitioner filed a Motion to Vacate
the Scheduling Order Based On Good Cause showing good cause as
to why additional time is required to conclude the proceedings
and for the trial court to enter a final order.
2. On August 10, 2007, Petitioner discovered on this
Court’s online docket that the Respondent had filed a Response
to Petitioner’s motion. At the time of filing this Motion for
Opportunity to be Heard, Mr. Lightbourne had yet to receive a
service copy via facsimile as certified by Respondents.
3. The Respondent’s response makes several
misrepresentations and leaves out pertinent information from the
record below. Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court
allow him the opportunity to be heard based on the State’s
misrepresentations.


4. Specifically, the Respondents represent that after
extensive evidentiary hearings in this case Mr. Lightbourne
“finished presenting the evidence he sought to produce” on or
about July 21, 2007. This is completely inaccurate. On July
21, 2007, Mr. Lightbourne filed a Motion to Leave the
Evidentiary Hearing Open based in part on the disclosure of
public records just 5 days earlier and the fact that the
Department of Corrections had been ordered to comply with Mr.
Lightbourne’s public records demand on July 20, 2007. See
Attached Motion to Leave Evidentiary Hearing Open. The circuit
court orally granted Mr. Lightbourne’s motion on July 22, 2007.

5. To date, Mr. Lightbourne has yet to receive records
responsive to the entirety of his demand to the Department of
Corrections and filed a Motion to Compel those records on August
9, 2007. While the Respondents indicate that the “Department of
Corrections is in the process of addressing the additional
public records requests”, is Mr. Lightbourne to go forward with
a final hearing and then receive the information ordered to be
turned over by the circuit court when the Department of
Corrections gets around to it?