Bonilla v. David Anthony et. al.

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner and a condemned prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The complaints presented nearly identical claims against various federal judges, state judges, and other government officials. Bonilla sought relief concerning his underlying conviction or the way his other state and federal cases had been handled.

The order states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition in this court with appointed counsel and was also represented by counsel in state-court proceedings. The court further noted that he had an extensive history of filing similar frivolous cases.

Rulings

The court addressed Bonilla's ability to proceed without paying the filing fees. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has been disqualified from that status may proceed without paying only if the complaint shows that the prisoner faced an imminent danger of serious physical injury when the complaint was filed. The court found that Bonilla's allegations did not show such danger, so he could not proceed without paying the fees.

The court also ruled that, even if an application to proceed without paying the fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the legal rules and decisions identified as Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion does not explain separately how each cited authority applied to each case. The court dismissed the cases with prejudice.

Other Orders

The court stated that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not provide a reasonable basis to question the undersigned judge's impartiality. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton therefore did not take further action on that issue. The clerk was ordered to terminate all pending motions and close the cases. The clerk was also ordered to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases.