Bonilla v. Del Norte County

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, a condemned state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He named various federal judges, state judges, and counties as defendants. The complaints presented very similar claims seeking relief related to his underlying conviction and the handling of his self-filed petitions for review of detention and other cases in state and federal court.

The opinion states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his detention in the same court with appointed counsel and was also represented by counsel in state-court proceedings concerning such a petition.

Fee-free filing and other barriers

To the extent Bonilla sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fee, the court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) disqualified him from doing so unless he was in immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed. The court found that his allegations did not show such danger. The court therefore held that he could not proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court further stated that, even if a fee application were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the legal rules identified in Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion did not provide a separate claim-by-claim analysis of those barriers.

Ruling

The court dismissed the cases with prejudice. It also rejected the apparent request for the undersigned judge to step aside, stating that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not create a reasonable question about the judge's impartiality and that judges generally have a duty to decide assigned cases absent legitimate grounds for recusal.

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.