Bonilla v. Clerk's Office Employees

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, described by the court as a state prisoner and condemned prisoner, filed multiple complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows certain civil-rights claims against state actors. The complaints named various federal and state judges and other officials. They presented nearly identical claims concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction and the handling of his cases in state and federal court.

The opinion states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his custody in the same court with appointed counsel and was also represented by counsel in state-court proceedings. The opinion identifies the related federal matter as Case No. 08-0471 YGR and the state proceeding as In re Bonilla, Case No. 20-2986 PJH, Docket No. 1 at 7.

Reasons for dismissal

The court addressed Bonilla’s ability to proceed without paying filing fees. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has been disqualified from proceeding without paying may do so only if the complaint shows that the prisoner faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when the complaint was filed. The court stated that Bonilla had previously been disqualified under that provision and that these complaints did not show imminent danger at the relevant time. Therefore, he could not proceed without paying the filing fees.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the doctrines and authorities identified in Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion does not provide a separate claim-by-claim analysis of those barriers.

The court also rejected the suggestion that the judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned because of Bonilla’s repetitive and frivolous filings. The opinion notes that Bonilla named the judge as a defendant in one of the cases and states that the judge had a duty to sit absent legitimate grounds for recusal.

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 submits in those closed cases.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court disposed of the cases based on filing-fee eligibility and other threshold legal barriers rather than deciding the underlying civil-rights claims on their merits.