Bonilla v. Volkman
- Phyllis Hamilton
- 4:21-cv-01490
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Steven Wayne Bonilla v. State of California, Judge Hamilton dismissed multiple civil-rights cases with prejudice after finding no imminent danger and additional legal barriers.
Steven Wayne Bonilla and the multiple civil-rights cases he filed; the order also affected the named defendants by ending those cases and directed the clerk to 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 against federal judges, state judges, counties, and federal agencies. He raised similar claims about his conviction and how courts handled his other cases.
The court found that Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fee because his allegations did not show that he faced an immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed. The court also said that, even if he had been allowed to proceed without paying, legal rules would bar the lawsuits.
Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton dismissed the cases with prejudice, ended all pending motions, and closed the cases. The clerk was instructed to return any additional documents Bonilla submitted in those closed cases without filing them.
The detailed version
- Bonilla v. Volkman · No. 4:21-cv-01490
- Phyllis Hamilton
- Mar. 9, 2021
Background
Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner and a condemned prisoner, filed multiple complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil-rights statute. The defendants included various federal judges, state judges, counties, and federal agencies. The complaints presented similar claims concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction and the handling of his other petitions and cases. The order also noted that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his conviction with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings challenging his conviction.
Filing-Fee Restriction
The court stated that Bonilla had previously been disqualified from proceeding in forma pauperis, meaning without paying the filing fee, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). That restriction could be overcome only if he showed that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show such danger.
Other Grounds for Dismissal
The court further stated that, even if Bonilla’s applications to proceed without paying the filing fee were 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 order did not decide the underlying merits of Bonilla’s claims.
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 order was signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.