Bonilla

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed five similar complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law that allows certain civil-rights claims against state actors. He filed the complaints without a lawyer. The opinion says that he sought relief related to his underlying conviction or the handling of his other cases by state and federal courts, but that he named no specific defendants.

The opinion also notes that Bonilla was a condemned prisoner with a pending federal petition challenging his custody in the same court, where he had appointed counsel. It states that he was also represented by counsel in state-court proceedings concerning that petition.

Reasons for dismissal

The court addressed Bonilla's possible request to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning without prepaying filing fees. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), the court said he had already been disqualified from proceeding this way unless he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show such danger.

The court further stated that, even if Bonilla's request to proceed without prepaying fees were granted, his lawsuits would be barred under the legal rules and cases it cited: Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion does not assign a separate one of those grounds to each case or explain each ground in detail.

Ruling

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton ordered that the five cases be dismissed with prejudice. The order also directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions, close the cases, and return without filing any further documents Bonilla submitted in them.