Bonilla v. Firetag

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner and condemned prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The opinion says the complaints presented very similar claims and sought relief concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction or the handling of his various state and federal court petitions and cases. The opinion also states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his custody with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings.

Proceeding Without Paying Filing Fees

The court stated that Bonilla had been disqualified from proceeding without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. The court found that the allegations did not show imminent danger at the time of filing. It therefore concluded that Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fees.

Other Bars to the Lawsuits

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the rules identified in Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion does not provide a separate claim-by-claim analysis of which cited rule applied to which complaint.

Disposition

The court dismissed the cases with prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases, and to return without filing any further documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases. The court also declined to recuse Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, explaining that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not alone provide a reason to question her impartiality.