Bonilla v. Marin County Superior Court
- Phyllis Hamilton
- 4:24-cv-07315
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Steven Wayne Bonilla v. Alameda County District Attorney’s Office, Judge Hamilton dismissed multiple civil-rights cases with prejudice because Bonilla could not proceed without fees and the suits were barred.
Steven Wayne Bonilla’s multiple civil-rights cases were dismissed with prejudice. The order also terminated all pending motions, closed the cases, and directed the clerk to return without filing any further documents Bonilla submits in those closed cases.
What happened
Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state prisoner representing himself, filed multiple nearly identical civil-rights lawsuits against federal and state judges and state courts. He sought relief related to his conviction and the handling of his other cases.
The court ruled that Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fees because his allegations did not show an imminent danger of serious physical injury. The court also said that, even if he were allowed to proceed without fees, the lawsuits would be barred by several legal rules concerning challenges to convictions, ongoing state proceedings, and interference with other courts.
Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton dismissed the cases with prejudice, ordered the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases, and directed the clerk to return without filing any further documents Bonilla submits in those closed cases.
The detailed version
- Bonilla v. Marin County Superior Court · No. 4:24-cv-07315
- Phyllis Hamilton
- Oct. 24, 2024
Background
Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state prisoner, filed multiple complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil-rights statute. The complaints presented nearly identical claims and named various federal and state judges and state courts as defendants. Bonilla sought relief concerning his underlying conviction and the handling of his other cases.
The court noted that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his imprisonment with appointed counsel and was also represented by counsel in state-court proceedings. The court further noted Bonilla’s history of filing similar cases.
Proceeding Without Paying Filing Fees
The court held that Bonilla was disqualified from proceeding without paying filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The allegations did not show that he was in such danger at the time of filing.
Reasons for Dismissal
The court also ruled that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the legal rules identified in the opinion, including rules concerning challenges to criminal convictions, ongoing state proceedings, and interference with other courts. The court therefore dismissed the cases with prejudice.
The court separately addressed Bonilla’s naming of the judge as a defendant in three of the cases. It found no basis to question the judge’s impartiality because of the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings, particularly because Bonilla made no specific allegations against the judge.
Disposition
The court ordered the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases. It also ordered the clerk to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submits in those closed cases. The order was signed by United States District Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.