Bonilla v. Contra Costa County Superior Court

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. 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 or the way his other cases had been handled by state and federal courts.

The order notes that Bonilla had a pending federal petition concerning his imprisonment in the same district, with appointed counsel, and was represented by counsel in state court proceedings concerning his imprisonment.

Permission to Proceed Without Paying Fees

The court explained that Bonilla had previously been disqualified from proceeding without paying filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he showed that he was in immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show such danger. The court therefore ruled that Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fees.

Other Grounds Identified by the Court

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the legal rules discussed in the order, including rules concerning challenges to convictions, interference with ongoing proceedings, and suits against federal courts or judges.

Disposition

The court dismissed the cases with prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases. It also ordered the clerk to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submitted in those closed cases.

Bonilla named Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton as a defendant in three of the cases but made no specific allegations against her. Judge Hamilton concluded that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not provide a reasonable basis to question her impartiality.