JAMES IRA SAMPLES V. HON. WILLIAM ANTHONY KITCHEN III, ET AL. — OPINION AND ORDER DENYING WRIT AND MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE STAY

IMPORTANT NOTICE “NOT TO BE PUBLISHED OPINION” THIS OPINION IS DESIGNATED “NOT TO BE PUBLISHED” PURSUANT TO RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE (RAP) 40(D). THIS OPINION SHALL NOT BE CITED AS BINDING PRECEDENT IN ANY OTHER CASE IN ANY COURT OF THIS STATE. UNDER RAP 41, UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS OF KENTUCKY APPELLATE COURTS RENDERED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2003, THAT ARE FINAL UNDER RAP 40(G), MAY BE CITED BY A PARTY FOR CONSIDERATION BY A COURT IF THERE IS NO PUBLISHED OPINION THAT ADEQUATELY ADDRESSES THE POINT OF LAW BEING ARGUED BY A PARTY. IF AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION IS CITED FOR CONSIDERATION BY A COURT THE OPINION SHALL BE SET OUT AS AN UNPUBLISHED OPINION IN THE DOCUMENT IN WHICH THE UNPUBLISHED OPINION IS CITED.

-- 1 of 5 --

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Supreme Court of Kentucky 2026-SC-0115-OA JAMES IRA SAMPLES PETITIONER V. IN SUPREME COURT HONORABLE WILLIAM ANTHONY KITCHEN, JUDGE, MCCRACKEN CIRCUIT COURT RESPONDENT AND COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY REAL PARTY IN INTEREST OPINION AND ORDER OF THE COURT DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT AND DENYING MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE STAY OF SENTENCING James Ira Samples, proceeding pro se, has filed an “Original Action, Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Writ of Prohibition, and Motion for Immediate Stay of Sentencing.” On March 25, 2026, following a jury trial, Samples was convicted of flagrant non-support, a Class D felony. Commonwealth v. Samples, McCracken Circuit Court No. 16-CR-00450. He was sentenced to imprisonment for one year and nine months. The petition before us was tendered to this Court two days before he was convicted and sentenced.

-- 2 of 5 --

2 It is difficult to discern what the precise basis for this original action is. It appears Samples was disgruntled by the circuit court’s refusal to allow him to testify that the reason he refused to pay his child support is that either his ex-wife, his ex-wife’s husband, or both, use methamphetamine and that he did not want his child support payments to fund that methamphetamine use. He also raises vague allegations of misconduct and violations of his constitutional rights by the circuit court judge, the prosecutor, the public defender’s office, and McCracken County Jail staff. He seeks to have the imposition of his sentence stayed pending the outcome of this original action. Nevertheless, we agree with the Commonwealth’s argument that this original action must be dismissed as improperly filed. Kentucky Rule of Appellate Procedure (RAP) 60(A) directs that “[o]riginal proceedings in an appellate court may be prosecuted only against a judge or agency whose decisions may be reviewed as a matter of right by that appellate court.” As noted, Samples was sentenced to one year and nine months’ imprisonment. Therefore, the Kentucky Court of Appeals would be the court to which Samples would appeal his conviction and sentence as a matter of right. K Y . C ONST . § 110(2)(b)(“Appeals from a judgment of the Circuit Court imposing a sentence of death or life imprisonment or imprisonment for twenty years or more shall be taken directly to the Supreme Court. In all other cases, criminal and civil, the Supreme Court shall exercise appellate jurisdiction as provided by its rules.”). Any original action must therefore be filed in the Court of Appeals.

-- 3 of 5 --

3 Moreover, even assuming for the sake of argument that his petition may be properly filed in this Court, Samples has asserted no argument that would entitle him to a writ of prohibition or mandamus. A writ of prohibition may be granted upon a showing that (1) the lower court is proceeding or is about to proceed outside of its jurisdiction and there is no remedy through an application to an intermediate court; or (2) that the lower court is acting or is about to act erroneously, although within its jurisdiction, and there exists no adequate remedy by appeal or otherwise and great injustice and irreparable injury will result if the petition is not granted. Hoskins v. Maricle, 150 S.W.3d 1, 10 (Ky. 2004). Samples’ petition only argues under the second class of writ, and it fails to demonstrate that he has no adequate remedy by appeal or that great injustice and irreparable injury will result if his petition is not granted. His claim that the circuit court erroneously prevented him from testifying or presenting evidence may be, and should be, addressed on direct appeal. And his general arguments about being subjected to incarceration are insufficient to demonstrate irreparable harm. See Osborn v. Wolfford, 39 S.W.2d 672, 674 (Ky. App. 1931). Samples’ petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and motion for immediate stay of sentencing are accordingly denied. We additionally deny any and all other requests for relief made in the petition, to wit: that the judgment entered against him be vacated; that a new trial be ordered; that the prosecutor be disqualified; that the matter be removed from McCracken County; that a special judge be appointed; that an order be entered forbidding Samples from being returned to McCracken County Jail; that this Court determine whether Samples’ appointed public defenders committed

-- 4 of 5 --

4 misconduct; and that the conduct of the circuit court judge be referred by this Court to the Judicial Conduct Commission for further investigation. All sitting. Lambert, C.J.; Bisig, Conley, Goodwine, Keller, and Nickell, JJ., concur. Thompson, J., concurs in result only. ENTERED: October 22, 2026. _______________________________________ CHIEF JUSTICE

-- 5 of 5 --