Bonilla v. Gallagher

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, identified as a state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The complaints were nearly identical. They named various state courts and judges as defendants and sought relief concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction or the handling of his other cases in state and federal courts.

The opinion states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition in the same court with appointed counsel and was represented by counsel in state court proceedings. The opinion does not describe the individual allegations in detail beyond their connection to his conviction and the handling of other cases.

Rulings

The court held that, to the extent Bonilla sought permission to proceed without paying the filing fees, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) disqualified him from doing so unless he showed that he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaints. The court concluded that the allegations did not show such danger.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying 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 opinion therefore ordered that the cases be dismissed with prejudice.

The court also addressed Bonilla’s request for recusal in one of the cases, where he named the judge as a defendant. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton denied the request, stating that Bonilla’s arguments were meritless and that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not provide a basis for questioning the judge’s impartiality.

Disposition

The court dismissed all listed cases with prejudice, terminated all pending motions, and directed the clerk to close the cases. It also ordered the clerk to return, without filing, any further documents Bonilla submitted in those closed cases.