Bonilla v. Marin County Court Clerk's Office

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, a condemned state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while representing himself. The complaints raised nearly identical claims and named various federal and state courts as defendants. The order says Bonilla sought relief concerning his underlying conviction or the handling of his other cases.

The order also notes that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his custody in the same court with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings. The court did not describe those other proceedings as part of the claims decided in this order.

Court’s Analysis

Bonilla sought, or potentially sought, permission to proceed without paying the filing fee. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), the court said he was disqualified from using that procedure unless he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court found that the allegations did not show imminent danger at the time of filing.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying the filing fee were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under the legal rules identified in the order: Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The order did not provide a separate claim-by-claim explanation of how each cited rule applied.

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 additional documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases.