Bonilla v. County of Alameda

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed nine related civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The complaints named several counties and state and federal officials. The court said the claims were nearly identical and sought relief concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction or the way state and federal courts handled his other cases. The opinion also noted that Bonilla had a pending federal petition concerning his conviction with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings.

Filing-fee status

Bonilla sought, or could have sought, permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) disqualified him from that status unless he showed that he faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show such danger. It therefore held that Bonilla could not proceed without paying the filing fee.

Other legal bars

The court further stated that, even if an application 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 opinion did not separately explain which specific legal bar applied to which claim or defendant.

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. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order.