Bonilla v. El Dorado County Court Clerk's Office

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed numerous similar civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He proceeded without a lawyer in these cases. The complaints named numerous county clerks and federal judges and sought relief related to Bonilla’s underlying conviction and to the way state and federal courts handled his other cases. The opinion also notes that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his detention with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings.

Filing-fee ruling and legal barriers

The court ruled that Bonilla was disqualified from proceeding without prepaying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he showed that he was in immediate danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show such danger, so he could not proceed without paying the fees.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without prepaying fees 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. Based on those grounds, the court dismissed the cases with prejudice.

Recusal and case closure

The court also addressed whether the judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned because of the repetitive and allegedly frivolous filings. It concluded that these were not cases requiring the judge to step aside.

The order directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases. It also directed the clerk to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases.

Disposition

The court dismissed the listed cases with prejudice, denied Bonilla permission to proceed without prepaying filing fees because he did not satisfy the immediate-danger exception, declined to step aside, terminated the pending motions, and closed the cases.