Bonilla v. First Appellate District Court Judges

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, described in the opinion as a state prisoner and a condemned prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The cases had related docket numbers, including 23-cv-3305-PJH, 23-cv-3306-PJH, 23-cv-3307-PJH, 23-cv-3308-PJH, 23-cv-3309-PJH, 23-cv-3329-PJH, 23-cv-3331-PJH through 23-cv-3339-PJH, 23-cv-3340-PJH through 23-cv-3343-PJH, and 23-cv-3355-PJH through 23-cv-3359-PJH.

Bonilla presented nearly identical claims and named various federal and state judges as defendants. The opinion says he sought relief concerning his underlying conviction or the way his other cases had been handled by state and federal courts. It also states that he had a pending federal petition challenging his custody and was represented by counsel in state proceedings concerning his custody.

Reasons for dismissal

The court addressed Bonilla's possible request to proceed without paying the filing fee. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has been disqualified from proceeding without paying must show that he faced an imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. The court found that Bonilla's allegations did not show such a danger, so he could not proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying had been granted, the lawsuits would be barred under several authorities: Heck v. Humphrey, which can limit civil-rights claims that would undermine a conviction; Younger v. Harris, concerning certain ongoing state proceedings; and two Ninth Circuit decisions concerning similar limits on suits against courts or judges. The opinion did not decide the underlying validity of Bonilla's conviction or the other courts' handling of his cases.

The court also considered whether its judge should be disqualified. Bonilla named Judge Hamilton as a defendant in one of the cases, but the court found no legitimate reason to question her impartiality and cited the general duty of a judge to decide assigned cases when no valid reason for disqualification exists.

Disposition

The court dismissed the cases with prejudice. It ordered 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.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the cases based on filing-fee eligibility and legal bars, without deciding the underlying challenges to Bonilla's conviction or to the handling of his other cases.