Bonilla v. Contra Costa County

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state inmate, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Contra Costa County. He was proceeding without a lawyer.

Filing-fee status

The court stated that Bonilla had previously been disqualified from proceeding in forma pauperis, meaning without prepaying the required filing fee, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That exception would not apply unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. The court determined that the allegations did not show imminent danger at that time. As a result, Bonilla could not proceed without prepaying the filing fee.

Other basis for dismissal

The court separately stated that, even if Bonilla’s request to proceed without prepaying the filing fee were granted, the lawsuit would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994). The opinion did not provide further explanation of the underlying allegations or explain in detail how Heck applied.

Disposition

The court dismissed the case with prejudice. The clerk was ordered to close the case and return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submitted after closure.

Impartiality statement

The court also stated that this was not a case in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, citing a Ninth Circuit decision concerning a judge’s duty to sit absent a legitimate reason for recusal.