Bonilla v. Lee

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, described as a state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaints presented nearly identical claims and named various federal and state judges and other officials as defendants. Bonilla sought relief relating to his underlying conviction and the handling of his other state and federal court cases.

The court also noted that Bonilla was a condemned prisoner with a pending federal petition challenging his custody in the same court, where he had appointed counsel. The court stated that he was represented by counsel in state court proceedings as well.

Filing-fee restriction

To the extent Bonilla sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fee, the court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) disqualified him from doing so unless he showed that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show imminent danger at that time.

Other legal barriers

The court further stated that, even if Bonilla’s applications to proceed without paying filing fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under legal rules identified in Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion did not provide a separate claim-by-claim analysis of those barriers.

Ruling

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

The court separately rejected the suggestion that the judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned because of the repetitive and frivolous filings. The opinion noted that Bonilla named the judge as a defendant in four of the cases but made no specific allegations against her in those cases.