Bonilla v. Santa Clara County Superior Court

Background

Steven Wayne Bonilla, a condemned state prisoner, filed multiple civil-rights complaints under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 without a lawyer. The complaints named various state courts and federal judges and presented nearly identical claims concerning Bonilla’s underlying conviction or the handling of his other cases. The opinion also states that Bonilla had a pending federal petition challenging his imprisonment in the same district court with appointed counsel, and that he was represented by counsel in state-court proceedings challenging his imprisonment.

Court’s analysis

The court stated that Bonilla had previously been disqualified from proceeding without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), unless he showed that he was in imminent danger of serious physical injury when he filed. The allegations did not make that showing, 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 authorities it cited: Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, and Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The opinion also rejected any suggestion that the judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned because of the repetitive and frivolous filings. It cited the general duty of a judge to hear assigned cases absent legitimate grounds for recusal.

Disposition

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