Bonilla v. Freeman

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed multiple complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The complaints presented nearly identical claims against various federal and state judges and other officials. Bonilla sought relief concerning his underlying conviction and the handling of his other cases. The order also noted that he had a pending federal petition challenging his conviction in the same court with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings.

Filing-fee status and legal bars

To the extent Bonilla sought permission to proceed without paying filing fees, the court held that he was disqualified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), which limits that status for certain prisoners with qualifying filing histories unless they faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when they filed. The court found that the complaints did not show such danger.

The court further held that, even if an application to proceed without paying filing fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the legal doctrines and authorities identified in the order, including Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The order did not separately analyze the underlying claims on their merits.

Ruling

The court dismissed the cases with prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases, and it ordered the clerk to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submits in those closed cases. The court also rejected the contention that the judge's impartiality could reasonably be questioned because of the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order.