Bonilla v. Ortega

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The opinion describes him as a state prisoner and a condemned prisoner who also had a pending federal habeas matter. He was represented by counsel in state-court habeas proceedings, but the complaints in these cases were filed without a lawyer.

The complaints were nearly identical. They named various federal and state judges as defendants and sought relief concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction or the way his other cases had been handled by state and federal courts. The opinion lists multiple case numbers, including 24-cv-1206-PJH, 24-cv-1211-PJH, 24-cv-1486-PJH, 24-cv-1488-PJH, 24-cv-1490-PJH, 24-cv-1491-PJH, 24-cv-1492-PJH, 24-cv-1493-PJH, 24-cv-1494-PJH, 24-cv-1536-PJH, 24-cv-1565-PJH, 24-cv-1566-PJH, 24-cv-1567-PJH, 24-cv-1568-PJH, 24-cv-1569-PJH, 24-cv-1570-PJH, 24-cv-1571-PJH, 24-cv-1572-PJH, 24-cv-1574-PJH, 24-cv-1575-PJH, 24-cv-1689-PJH, 24-cv-1690-PJH, 24-cv-1709-PJH, 24-cv-1710-PJH, 24-cv-1711-PJH, and 24-cv-1854-PJH.

Court’s reasoning

The court addressed Bonilla’s ability to proceed without paying filing fees. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), a prisoner who has been disqualified from that status may proceed without paying fees only if he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed the complaint. The court determined that Bonilla’s allegations did not show such danger. It therefore concluded that he could not proceed without paying the filing fees.

The court further stated that, even if an application to proceed without paying fees were granted, the lawsuits would be barred under Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, or Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The court also noted Bonilla’s extensive history of filing similar cases.

The opinion separately addressed the concern that the assigned judge might be required to step aside because Bonilla named the judge as a defendant in three of the cases. The court concluded that the repetitive and frivolous nature of the filings did not provide a reasonable basis to question the judge’s impartiality.

Disposition

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

Classification basis

This is a procedural order because the court disposed of the cases based on prisoner filing-fee restrictions and other legal bars rather than deciding the underlying civil-rights claims on their merits.