1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

EASTERN DIVISION 

JAMES J. HOLLIS, 

 CASE NO. 2:11-CV-1133 

 Petitioner, JUDGE JAMES L. GRAHAM 

 Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers 

 v. 

WARDEN, ROSS CORRECTIONAL 

INSTITUTION, 

 Respondent. 

OPINION AND ORDER 

 On November 25, 2013, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation

recommending that the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. Petitioner has 

filed an Objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. (See ECF Nos. 15, 

16.) 

 Petitioner objects to the Magistrate Judge’s dismissal on the merits of his claim of 

insufficiency of the evidence. Petitioner makes all of the same arguments he previously 

presented. He again contends that the State only established, at the most, his presence at the 

scene of the crime. He again argues that the State failed to establish that it was his pubic hair 

which was found in the blood-stained sheets wrapped around the victim’s head, because in 1992, 

test results indicated he was not a match. He disputes the evidence indicating that it took two 

people to enter a window by using a bucket. He points out that police failed to obtain fingerprint 

evidence, witnesses to the offense, the murder weapon, or other evidence tying him to the crime, 

including any evidence that the bite marks or saliva left on the victim belonged to him. He 

contends that the prosecution failed to establish that he had the purposeful intent required to 

Case: 2:11-cv-01133-JLG-EPD Doc #: 17 Filed: 02/14/14 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
2

establish the charge of complicity to commit murder. He argues that his alibi establishes his 

innocence of the charge. 

 For the reasons already addressed in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation,

the Court finds none of these arguments to be persuasive. To the extent that Petitioner again 

raises a claim regarding the alleged violation of state law, this claim fails to provide a basis for 

federal habeas corpus relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a). The test results of the hair located at the 

scene of the crime initially failed to establish a link to Petitioner. Later DNA analysis, however, 

matched and linked Petitioner to the hair found at the scene of the crime. See State v. Hollis, 

09CA9, 2010 WL 3294327, at *3 (Ohio App. 4th Dist. Aug. 5, 2010). As discussed by the 

Magistrate Judge, the standard for reviewing a claim of insufficiency of the evidence requires 

this Court to view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. Jackson v. 

Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979). This Court may therefore presume that the jury rejected 

Petitioner’s alibi defense as well as his explanation for the presence of his hair at the scene. 

Reviewing all of the evidence under this standard, this Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge 

that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient to sustain Petitioner’s conviction. 

 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court has conducted a de novo review. For the 

reasons discussed by the state appellate court and detailed in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and 

Recommendation, Petitioner’s Objection (ECF No. 15, 16) is OVERRULED. The Report and 

Recommendation is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED. This action is hereby DISMISSED. 

Date: February 14, 2014 s/James L. Graham 

 ______________________________ 

 JAMES L. GRAHAM 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

Case: 2:11-cv-01133-JLG-EPD Doc #: 17 Filed: 02/14/14 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>