Bonilla v. Judge Gonzalez-Rogers

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed with prejudice multiple pro se civil rights actions filed by condemned prisoner Steven Wayne Bonilla against federal judges and state court officials. The court concluded that Bonilla was barred from proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), that his claims were subject to additional doctrines including Heck, Younger, Demos, or Mullis, and directed the clerk to close the cases and return further filings without filing.

Holdings

1. A prisoner disqualified from proceeding in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) may proceed IFP only if the complaint shows that he was under imminent danger of serious physical injury at the time of filing; Bonilla's allegations did not satisfy that exception.
2. Even if Bonilla were permitted to proceed IFP, the lawsuits were barred under Heck v. Humphrey, Younger v. Harris, Demos v. U.S. District Court, or Mullis v. U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Bonilla could proceed in forma pauperis despite his prior disqualification under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
2. Whether the complaints were barred because the requested relief would improperly challenge Bonilla's conviction or interfere with ongoing state or federal judicial proceedings.
3. Whether the three cases should be dismissed with prejudice.

Disposition

dismissed