Bonilla v. Monterey County

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed multiple nearly identical complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal statute allowing certain civil-rights claims against government officials. He was proceeding without a lawyer. The complaints named various federal and state judges and county officials and sought relief concerning his underlying conviction or the handling of his other state and federal court cases.

The order notes that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his detention in the same court, with appointed counsel, and was also represented by counsel in state-court proceedings. The order does not decide the merits of those other proceedings.

Reasons for dismissal

The court held that Bonilla was disqualified from proceeding without prepaying filing fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), 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 at the time of filing.

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, or Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The order did not conduct a merits determination of Bonilla’s underlying conviction-related allegations.

Ruling and case administration

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton dismissed the cases 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. The order additionally stated that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not provide a basis to question the judge’s impartiality, and a footnote states that Bonilla named the judge as a defendant in one case but did not present a basis for recusal.