Case Summary: IN THE MATTER OF HERMAN LEE YOUNG, No. 8520DC791 (N.C. Ct. App., filed Dec. 17, 1985)

Factual and Procedural Background

The juvenile respondent, Herman Lee Young, age twelve, was the subject of delinquency petitions alleging (1) felonious breaking and entering of a residence with intent to commit a felony and (2) felonious assault with intent to kill an occupant of the residence with a deadly weapon resulting in serious injury. The trial court found respondent delinquent and ordered commitment to a training school until his eighteenth birthday. The State presented evidence of a statement made by respondent during custodial interrogation. The trial court admitted that statement into evidence. The juvenile respondent appealed the disposition order entered 19 March 1985 in District Court, Union County. The Court of Appeals heard the appeal on 20 November 1985 and filed its opinion on 17 December 1985.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the in-custody admission or confession of a juvenile under 14 years of age was admissible where the record contains no factual finding that the confession was made in the presence of the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian, or attorney as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b).
Whether the trial court's statement regarding a juvenile's waiver of rights (that the juvenile "together with his mother knew what they were doing") sufficed as a factual finding that the statutory presence requirement of N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b) had been satisfied.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent	Rule or Principle Cited For	Application by the Court
In re Riley, 61 N.C. App. 749, 301 S.E.2d 750 (1983)	Cited in connection with the legal standard governing a juvenile's waiver of rights under the juvenile confession/admission statutes.	The court invoked In re Riley (along with N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(d)) to explain that the trial court's statement addressed the voluntariness/waiver question. The court concluded that the Riley authority supports the view that a waiver finding is distinct from a factual finding that a confession was made in the presence of a parent, guardian, custodian, or attorney as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b).

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court's analysis proceeded from the statutory text and the record. It quoted N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b): "When the juvenile is less than 14 years of age, no in-custody admission or confession resulting from interrogation may be admitted into evidence unless the confession or admission was made in the presence of the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian, or attorney." The Court of Appeals observed that the record contained no factual finding addressing compliance with this statutory presence requirement.

The trial court had made a statement framed around whether there was a valid waiver — stating that the juvenile "together with his mother knew what they were doing" and that the court was satisfied the waiver was knowingly, intelligently, understandingly and voluntarily made. The Court of Appeals explained that this statement pertained only to waiver under N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(d) and related authority (citing In re Riley), and did not constitute a factual finding that the confession itself was made in the presence of the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian or attorney as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b).

Because the statutory prerequisite for admissibility of a confession by a juvenile under 14 is a factual finding that the confession was made in the required presence, and because the record lacked such a finding, the appellate court determined that the admission of the confession was not supported by the necessary record finding. Accordingly, the court remanded the case for a finding on compliance with N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b).

Holding and Implications

REMANDED

Holding: The Court of Appeals remanded the cause for a factual finding on whether the juvenile's in-custody confession was made in the presence of the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian, or attorney as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b). The appellate court concluded that the trial court's statement about waiver did not satisfy the statutory requirement of a finding that the confession itself was made in the required presence.

Implications: The direct effect is that the district court must make a specific factual finding as to compliance with N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595(b) regarding the presence requirement for admissibility of a confession by a juvenile under 14. The opinion does not elaborate on broader legal consequences beyond ordering remand for the required finding.

Disposition note: Remanded. Chief Judge Hedrick and Judge Johnson concurred. Opinion authored by Judge Whichard. Counsel of record included Assistant Attorney General Robert E. Cansler for the State and Joe P. McCollum, Jr. for respondent appellant.

Show full summary ...

IN THE MATTER OF HERMAN LEE YOUNG

Infants 17 — juvenile proceeding — admissibility of confession — presence of parent or guardian — absence of finding The confession of a twelve-year-old respondent was improperly admitted in a juvenile delinquency proceeding where the court made no factual finding that the confession itself was made in the presence of respondent's parent, guardian, custodian or attorney as required by N.C.G.S. 7A-595 (b). The trial court's statement that respondent "together with his mother knew what they were doing" related only to respondent's waiver of his rights and did not constitute a factual finding on the question of compliance with N.C.G.S. 7A-595 (b), and the cause must be remanded for a finding on compliance with the statute.

Juvenile petitions alleged that respondent, age twelve, is delinquent as defined in N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-517 (12) in that he (1) feloniously broke and entered a residence with intent to commit a felony therein, and (2) feloniously and with intent to kill assaulted an occupant of the residence with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury. The court found that respondent was delinquent and ordered him committed to training school for a period not to exceed his eighteenth birthday.

Respondent appeals.

WHICHARD, Judge.

The State presented evidence of a statement made by respondent during custodial interrogation. N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595 (b) provides: "When the juvenile is less than 14 years of age, no in-custody admission or confession resulting from interrogation may be admitted into evidence unless the confession or admission was made in the presence of the juvenile's parent, guardian, custodian, or attorney." The record contains no finding as to compliance with this provision.

The court did make the following statement: "The next point, whether or not there was a waiver, which was knowingly, intelligently, understandingly and voluntarily made, got my attention but I am satisfied by the evidence according to the required standard that he together with his mother knew what they were doing." This statement, however, relates only to respondent's waiver of his rights. See N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595 (d); In re Riley, 61 N.C. App. 749, 301 S.E.2d 750 (1983). It contains nothing that can be construed as a factual finding that the confession itself was made in the presence of respondent's parent, guardian, custodian or attorney as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595 (b).

We thus remand for a finding on compliance with N.C. Gen. Stat. 7A-595 (b).

Remanded.

Chief Judge HEDRICK and Judge JOHNSON concur.

IN RE YOUNG