Bonilla v. Hite

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state prisoner, filed multiple complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the federal civil-rights statute used to sue state actors for alleged violations of federal rights. He represented himself in these cases. The complaints were nearly identical and named various state courts and judges as defendants. They sought relief concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction or the way state and federal courts had handled his other cases.

The opinion also noted that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his custody in a related case, where he had appointed counsel, and was represented by counsel in state court proceedings.

Reasoning

The court addressed Bonilla’s request, or possible request, to proceed without paying the filing fee. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner disqualified under that statute may proceed without paying only if the complaint shows that the prisoner faced imminent danger of serious physical injury when the complaint was filed. The court found that Bonilla’s allegations did not show such danger, so he could not proceed without paying the filing fee.

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 and decisions discussed in Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion did not separately analyze each bar in detail.

Disposition

The court dismissed the cases with prejudice. It directed the clerk to terminate all pending motions and close the cases, and to return without filing any further documents Bonilla submitted in the closed cases. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order.