Court Opinion

ID: 9887089
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 17:04:44.242448+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:49:32.871492
License: Public Domain

Justice BEASLEY dissenting.
**426In Saldierna I , I dissented because defendant's statement, "Um, [c]an I call my mom?", was an unambiguous invocation of his right to have a parent present during questioning. See State v. Saldierna (Saldierna I ), 369 N.C. 401, 409, 794 S.E.2d 474, 479 (2016) (Beasley, J., dissenting). Upon this unambiguous invocation, law enforcement should have immediately ceased questioning and not resumed until defendant's mother was present or he reinitiated the conversation. See id. at 412, 794 S.E.2d at 481 (citing Edwards v. Arizona , 451 U.S. 477, 484-85, 101 S.Ct. 1880, 1884-85, 68 L.Ed. 2d 378, 386 (1981) ). Defendant did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive his right to have his mother present-rather, he unambiguously invoked that right. Thus, for the reasons stated in my dissent to Saldierna I , I respectfully dissent.