Barnett v. Barbadoro

2009 DNH 132

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: September 2, 2009
• Docket: 09-CV-281-SM
• Status: Published

Opinion

Barnett v . Barbadoro 09-CV-281-SM 09/02/09 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Cushaw B . Barnett, Plaintiff

v. Civil N o . 09-cv-281-SM Opinion N o . 2009 DNH 132 Paul J. Barbadoro, Defendant

O R D E R

This case was assigned to me in the random draw. The

plaintiff’s complaint names a judge of this court as defendant

and seeks monetary damages for alleged deprivation of plaintiff’s

constitutional rights, purportedly because the named judge

presided over plaintiff’s federal criminal prosecution and

imposed sentence (after defendant pled guilty to the charged

crime). Plaintiff, a federal prisoner acting pro s e , says that

the court was without subject matter jurisdiction over his

criminal case because his crime did not take place “on land under

the exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction of the federal

government,” and, accordingly, he says the judge unlawfully

deprived him of his liberty.

Ordinarily, given that the suit is brought against a

colleague, I would consider recusal and transfer of this case to

another district. In re United States, 441 F.3d 4 4 , 56-57 (1st Cir. 2006). But, the patently frivolous claims asserted in the

complaint “leave[s] no room for any rational person to imagine

that any bias could underlie [its dismissal].” Swan v .

Barbadoro, 520 F.3d 2 4 , 26 (1st Cir. 2008). And, “[t]here i s , in

addition, a countervailing concern ‘to prevent parties from too

easily obtaining the disqualification of a judge, thereby

potentially manipulating the system for strategic reasons

. . . .’” Id., citing In re Allied-Signal, Inc., 891 F.2d 9 6 7 ,

970 (1st Cir. 1989).

Here the complaint is patently frivolous for any number of

reasons. As in Swan, a judgment in plaintiff’s favor on the

complaint as filed would necessarily impugn the validity of his

criminal conviction, which is not permitted. Heck v . Humphrey,

512 U.S. 477 (1994). And, the claim that federal criminal law is

inapplicable within the borders of the United States is

completely frivolous. And, the named defendant enjoys absolute

judicial immunity from liability for judicial acts, such as

presiding over criminal prosecutions and imposing criminal

sentences. Stump v . Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978).

The complaint is summarily dismissed as frivolous, and for

failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and as

2 seeking monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such

relief. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. The clerk shall close the case.

SO ORDERED.

Steven J. McAuliffe 'Chief Judge

September 2 , 2009

cc: Cushaw B . Barnett, pro se