Bonilla v. Alameda County Superior Court

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner and a condemned prisoner, filed multiple pro se civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. “Pro se” means that he filed the cases without a lawyer. The order covers the following case numbers: 22-cv-7498-PJH, 22-cv-7516-PJH, 22-cv-7517-PJH, 22-cv-7546-PJH, 22-cv-7547-PJH, 22-cv-7548-PJH, 22-cv-7549-PJH, 22-cv-7711-PJH, 22-cv-7712-PJH, 22-cv-8982-PJH, 22-cv-8983-PJH, 22-cv-8984-PJH, 22-cv-9055-PJH, and 22-cv-9100-PJH.

The complaints were nearly identical. Bonilla named various state superior courts and state judges as defendants and sought relief concerning his underlying conviction or the handling of his other state and federal cases. The order also noted that he had a pending federal petition challenging his imprisonment with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state proceedings challenging his imprisonment.

Reasoning

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

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without prepaying 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 order did not separately explain which cited rule applied to which claim.

Disposition

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, and to return without filing any further documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases.