Bonilla v. Reardon

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner and a condemned prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also asked to proceed without paying the filing fees. The complaints named various federal or state judges as defendants and sought relief concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction and the handling of his state and federal petitions for release.

The order noted that Bonilla had a pending federal petition for release with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings. It also stated that Bonilla had previously been disqualified from proceeding without paying filing fees under the “three strikes” rule in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he was in immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed.

Reasons for the disposition

The court found that the allegations did not show immediate danger of serious physical injury at the time the complaints were filed. It therefore concluded that Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fees.

The court gave an additional reason: even if Bonilla’s requests to proceed without paying fees had been granted, the lawsuits would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, or Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion did not provide a separate claim-by-claim explanation of which cited rule applied to which lawsuit.

The order also stated that these cases were not ones in which the presiding judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

Ruling and case status

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton dismissed the cases with prejudice. 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 those closed cases. The opinion did not separately state a disposition for each individual fee-waiver request beyond these rulings.