Bonilla v. Bacciarini

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed multiple complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a statute that allows claims for violations of federal rights by state actors. He filed the cases without a lawyer. The complaints were nearly identical and named numerous state courts and state judges as defendants. They sought relief concerning Bonilla's underlying conviction or the way his other cases had been handled by state and federal courts. The opinion also states that Bonilla is a condemned prisoner with a pending federal petition challenging his custody and that he is represented by counsel in state-court custody proceedings.

Proceeding Without Paying Filing Fees

The court addressed whether Bonilla could proceed without paying the filing fees. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has been disqualified from proceeding without fees must show that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when the complaint was filed. The court stated that Bonilla had previously been disqualified under that provision. It found that the allegations in these complaints did not show imminent danger at the time of filing, so Bonilla could not proceed without paying the fees.

Other Bars Identified by the Court

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees 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 does not separately explain which of those authorities applies to which individual complaint or claim.

Ruling

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