Barker v. McKenzie

Filing 9

ORDER : 1) Petitioner's #8 Objection to Report and Recommendations are OVERRULED; 2) Judge Atkins's #7 Report and Recommendations is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court; 3) the Clerk is DIRECTED to transfer this action to the USDC for the Western District of Kentucky, Louisville Division. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 11/17/22.(JLS)cc: CORand Adam Anthony Barker by US Mail [Transferred from kyed on 11/18/2022.]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
NORTHERN DIVISION
ASHLAND
ADAM ANTHONY BARKER,
Petitioner,
v.
SHAWN MCKENZIE,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 0:22-cv-00086-GFVT-EBA
ORDER

*** *** *** ***
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by United States
Magistrate Judge Edward B. Atkins addressing Petitioner Adam Barker’s Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus [R. 1.] Mr. Barker seeks to attack his criminal conviction from the Jefferson
Circuit Court, which lies in the federal judicial district of the Western District of Kentucky.
Judge Atkins recommends that the Court transfer the action to the United States District Court
for the Western District of Kentucky, Louisville Division. [R. 7.] Mr. Barker objects to the
Report and Recommendation, arguing that he “is concerned that he may not receive a fair turn in
the” Western District because he alleges prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. [R. 8 at 1.]
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404, a district court may transfer a civil action to another district
where it might have been brought “for the convenience of parties and witnesses [and] in the
interest of justice.” Judge Atkins correctly recommends that the action be transferred to the
Western District because it is where “the witnesses and records are likely to be located.” [R. 7.]
Mr. Barker was convicted by a state court located in the Western District and alleges misconduct
by individuals located in the Western District. [R. 1 at 1; R. 8;] see also Braden v. 30th Jud. Cir.
Ct. of Ky., 410 U.S. 484, 493-94 (1973) (holding that the most appropriate district was “where all

the material events took place [and] the records and witnesses pertinent to petitioner’s claim
[were] likely to be found”). Although Mr. Barker alleges misconduct against federal prosecutors
and a state judge, the Court is confident that his claims will be fairly considered in the Western
District. Accordingly, and the Court being sufficiently advised, it is hereby ORDERED as
follows:
1. Petitioner Adam Barker’s Objections [R. 8] are OVERRULED,
2. Judge Atkins’s Report and Recommendation [R. 7] is ADOPTED as and for the opinion
of the Court, and;
3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the
Western District of Kentucky, Louisville Division.

This the 17th day of November, 2022.

2