Search and Seizure: Appeal and Error. The denial of a motion
for return of seized property is reviewed for an abuse of
Search and Seizure: Property: Presumptions: Proof. When
criminal proceedings have terminated, the person from whom
property was seized is presumed to have a right to its
return, and the burden is on the government to show that it
has a legitimate reason to retain the property.
Property: Presumptions: Proof. A presumption of ownership is
created by exclusive possession of personal property, and
evidence must be offered to overcome that presumption.
Search and Seizure: Property: Proof. One in possession of
property has the right to keep it against all but those with
better title, and the mere fact of seizure does not require
that entitlement be established anew.
___: ___ . Seizure of property from someone is prima facie
evidence of that person's right to possession of the
property, and unless another party presents evidence of
superior title, the person from whom the property was taken
need not present additional evidence of ownership.
Appeal and Error. An appellate court is not obligated to
engage in an analysis that is not necessary to adjudicate the
case and controversy before it.
from the District Court for Box Butte County: Travis P.
O'Gorman, Judge. Reversed and remanded for further
Neb.App. 68] Dominick L. Dubray, pro se.
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and George R. Love for
Chief Judge, and Inbody and Riedmann, Judges.
L. Dubray appeals from an order of the district court for Box
Butte County partially denying his motion for return of
seized property. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse
the order of the district court and remand the cause for