Bonilla v. Davis
Filing
3
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Vince Chhabria on 7/29/2016. (knm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/29/2016)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
STEVEN WAYNE BONILLA,
Case No. 16-cv-04127-VC (PR)
Plaintiff,
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE
v.
RONALD DAVIS, Warden,
Defendant.
Plaintiff Steven Wayne Bonilla, a state inmate, has filed a pro se petition for a writ of
mandamus about his state criminal conviction. Bonilla has been disqualified from proceeding in
forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) unless he is “under imminent danger of serious
physical injury” at the time he filed his complaint. 28 U.S.C. 1915(g); In re Steven Bonilla, No.
C 11-3180 CW (PR); Bonilla v. Dawson, No. C 13-0951 CW (PR).
The allegations in this complaint do not show that Bonilla was in imminent danger at the
time of filing. Therefore, he may not proceed in forma pauperis. Furthermore, he may not
proceed even if he pays the filing fee because this court lacks authority to issue a writ of
mandamus. See 28 U.S.C § 1361. The federal mandamus statute provides that "[t]he district
courts shall have original jurisdiction of any action in the nature of mandamus to compel an
officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof to perform a duty owed to the
plaintiff." Id. The statute only allows mandamus to compel federal actors and agencies; federal
district courts are without power to issue mandamus to direct state courts, state judicial officers,
or other state officials in the performance of their duties. A petition for a writ of mandamus to
compel a state court or official to take or refrain from some action is frivolous as a matter of law.
See Demos v. U.S. District Court, 925 F.2d 1160, 1161-62 (9th Cir. 1991).
Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice because amendment would be futile.
The Clerk of the Court shall enter a separate judgment and close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 29, 2016
______________________________________
VINCE CHHABRIA
United States District Judge
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?