Bonilla v. Spero
- Phyllis Hamilton
- 4:20-cv-06814
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Bonilla v. Clay, Judge Hamilton dismissed multiple civil-rights cases with prejudice after finding Bonilla could not proceed without prepaying fees and the suits faced legal bars.
Steven Wayne Bonilla's multiple civil-rights cases were dismissed with prejudice. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motions, close the cases, and return later submissions without filing them.
What happened
Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights cases without a lawyer under a federal civil-rights law. He sued state courts, federal judges, and court officials over his conviction and the handling of his habeas petitions and other cases. He had appointed counsel in a pending federal habeas case and a lawyer in state habeas proceedings.
The court said Bonilla was barred from proceeding without prepaying filing fees unless he showed an imminent danger of serious physical injury, and his allegations did not make that showing. The court also said that, even if he could proceed without prepaying fees, the lawsuits would be barred under several legal rules and prior decisions. It dismissed the cases with prejudice, terminated pending motions, closed the cases, and directed the clerk to return any further documents submitted in them without filing them.
Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton also ruled that the repetitive and frivolous filings did not create a reasonable question about her impartiality. She ordered the cases closed.
The detailed version
- Bonilla v. Spero · No. 4:20-cv-06814
- Phyllis Hamilton
- Oct. 26, 2020
Background
Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed multiple complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute. The related case numbers were 20-cv-06481-PJH, 20-cv-06810-PJH, 20-cv-06811-PJH, 20-cv-06812-PJH, 20-cv-06814-PJH, and 20-cv-07117-PJH.
The complaints named various state courts, federal judges, and court officials as defendants. The opinion states that Bonilla made very similar claims in all of the cases and sought relief concerning his underlying conviction and the handling of his various petitions for review of custody and other cases. The opinion also states that he had a pending federal petition concerning his custody with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state proceedings concerning his custody.
Filing-fee restriction
To the extent Bonilla sought permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees, the court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) disqualified him from doing so unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court cited two prior related proceedings involving Bonilla by case number, including Case No. 11-3180 CW and Case No. 13-0951 CW. It found that the allegations did not show imminent danger of serious physical injury.
Legal bars and disposition
The court further stated that, even if Bonilla's applications to proceed without prepaying filing fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the rules and decisions cited in the opinion, including Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The court therefore 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 the closed cases.
Impartiality issue
The court stated that these were not cases in which the undersigned judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned because of the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings. Citing Ninth Circuit authority, the court noted that, absent legitimate reasons for recusal, a judge has a duty to decide cases assigned to that judge.
Judge and order
Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order dated October 26, 2020. The opinion's stated disposition was dismissal of the multiple cases with prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.