RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY MOTION -Lightbourne

http://www.floridasupport.us/Florida/IanLightbourne/stateanswertoemergency.htm

http://www.floridasupport.us/Florida/IanLightbourne/Filed_09-12-2007_Response_To_Emergency_Motion.pdf


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

IAN DECO LIGHTBOURNE

Petitioner(s), Case No. SC06-2391

v.

BILL McCOLLUM

Respondent(s)

/

RESPONSE TO EMERGENCY MOTION

TO RELINQUISH JURISDICTION

COME NOW the Respondents, and respond as follows to
Lightbourne’s “emergency motion to relinquish jurisdiction”
which was filed late in the afternoon on September 11, 2007. The
stated purpose of the motion to relinquish jurisdiction is to
allow the trial court to rule on a “motion for rehearing and/or
clarification.”1 For the reasons set out below, the motion to
relinquish should be denied:

1. Lightbourne’s emergency motion to relinquish
jurisdiction is at least the fourth “emergency” motion he has
filed in an effort to delay this case, which was initiated when
he filed the “all writs” petition on December 14, 2006.

2. According to Lightbourne, the “basis” of the motion is a
newspaper article which purportedly ran in the September 11,
2007, online edition of the St. Petersburg Times, which
attributed certain comments to Circuit Judge Carven Angel. The

1 On September 12, 2007, the Circuit Court entered an order
denying Lightbourne’s motion for rehearing and/or clarification.
A copy of that order is attached.

July 31, 2007, order tracked the concerns expressed in open
court, and nothing attributed to Judge Angel by the press is
inconsistent with that order. Further, in light of the written
order issued on September 10, 2007 (in compliance with this
Court’s schedule), those “comments” do not suggest that Judge
Angel “overlooked or misapprehended” anything in denying
Lightbourne’s claims. The order speaks for itself, and what
Lightbourne labels as a “motion for rehearing” is no more than
yet another attempt to delay this case by attempting to reargue
it.

3. To the extent that Lightbourne’s claim based on the news
report deserves any further response, Judge Angel’s reported
comment is in no way inconsistent with the September 10, 2007,
order, which decided the issues that were before the Circuit
Court. Lightbourne’s motion is no more than another transparent
attempt to delay this case.

WHEREFORE, the Respondents submit that Lightbourne’s motion
to relinquish jurisdiction should be denied, and this case
should proceed in accordance with the previously-ordered
schedule.

Respectfully submitted,

BILL McCOLLUM

ATTORNEY GENERAL

_______________________________

KENNETH S. NUNNELLEY

Senior Assistant Attorney General
Florida Bar #998818

444 Seabreeze Blvd., 5th Floor

Daytona Beach, FL 32118

(386) 238-4990

FAX (386) 226-0457

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above
has been furnished by FAX and U.S. Mail to: Suzanne Myers
Keefer, Assistant CCRC-South, 101 NE Third Ave., Suite 400, Ft.
Lauderdale, Florida 33301, and Rock E. Hooker, Office of the
State Attorney, 19 N.W. Pine Avenue, Ocala, FL 34475, and Judge
Carven D. Angel, Circuit Court Judge, Marion County Justice
Center, 110 N.W. First Ave., Room 3A, Ocala, Florida 34475 on
this 12th day of September, 2007.

_______________________________

Of Counsel