Opinion ID: 1287369
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: ownership of mask

Text: [18] Poe claims the trial court erred when it allowed, over his hearsay objections, testimony from a police officer about the ownership of a black mask. The evidence showed that about noon on November 11, 2004, Poe flagged down Kevin Spellman near 30th and Spencer Streets in Omaha and requested a ride in Spellman's vehicle. Poe sat in the back behind the passenger's seat. When the car stopped in the parking lot of a liquor store, a bicycle patrolman for the Omaha Police Department smelled the odor of marijuana coming from the car and obtained Spellman's permission to conduct a search of the car. The officer found a black mask tucked under the front passenger's seat. The mask was made of stretchy material and would cover the entire head. The officer testified that no one in the car claimed ownership of the mask. Spellman testified that he was with his brother, David Moss, when Poe flagged him down. Poe was the only occupant of the back seat. While in the liquor store, Spellman saw two police officers next to the car, while Moss and Poe were outside the car. After giving the officers permission to search the car, Spellman saw one of the officers pull a mask from the back seat passenger area where Poe had been seated. Spellman testified that the mask was not in the car before he picked up Poe and that he cleaned out his car the day before. Spellman said the officer pulled the mask out of the car, held it up, and asked to whom it belonged. Spellman responded, It's not mine. He heard Poe say that neither the mask nor the car was his. Spellman described the mask as a black nylon whole head mask with a [n]etted face area and no eye or mouth holes. The mask was then placed back in Spellman's car. After he left the liquor store, Spellman threw the mask out of the car. Officer Lowell Petersen, one of the police officers who searched the vehicle, was asked: Did you ask any of the parties if the mask belonged to them? He responded: No. He was then asked whether anyone claimed ownership of the mask, and Poe objected to the response as hearsay. The objection was overruled, and Petersen testified, No. Petersen testified that he asked no questions about the mask, no one claimed ownership of it, and he put the mask back in the car. Poe argues that the nonverbal conduct of Moss, in failing to comment about ownership of the mask, was clearly intended as an assertion that the mask was not his. Moss did not testify at trial. Poe contends that Moss' conduct constituted an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted and that the trial court erred in failing to recognize it as such. We conclude the trial court did not err in overruling the hearsay objections and in admitting Petersen's testimony that he asked no questions about the mask and that none of the occupants claimed its ownership. Petersen's testimony was not hearsay because it was not offered to prove the truth of the ownership of the mask. Petersen testified to his observations and not to any statement or nonverbal conduct by any of the parties involved. The trial court did not err in overruling Poe's objections.