Bollar v. Eberlin

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[Cite as Bollar v. Eberlin, 121 Ohio St.3d 3, 2009-Ohio-258.] BOLLAR, APPELLANT, v. EBERLIN, WARDEN, APPELLEE. [Cite as Bollar v. Eberlin, 121 Ohio St.3d 3, 2009-Ohio-258.] Appeal from dismissal of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus Adequate remedy at law available Judgment affirmed. (No. 2008-1890 Submitted January 14, 2009 Decided January 28, 2009.) APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Belmont County, No. 08 BE 5. __________________ Per Curiam. {¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Gregory Earl Bollar, for a writ of habeas corpus, because he failed to attach all the commitment papers pertinent to his claim challenging the Ohio Adult Parole Authority s multiple revocations of his parole and extensions of his release date based on R.C. 2967.15(C)(1). See State ex rel. Bray v. Brigano (2001), 93 Ohio St.3d 458, 459, 755 N.E.2d 891, and Tucker v. McAninch (1998), 82 Ohio St.3d 423, 696 N.E.2d 595. {¶ 2} Notwithstanding Bollar s assertions to the contrary, those papers were material to his claim. Judgment affirmed. MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O CONNOR, O DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. __________________ Gregory Earl Bollar, pro se. Richard Cordray, Attorney General, and Jerri L. Fosnaught, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. ______________________

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.