{
  "id": 8524267,
  "name": "IN THE MATTER OF TONY VENSEN RILEY, Juvenile",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Riley",
  "decision_date": "1983-04-19",
  "docket_number": "No. 8214DC634",
  "first_page": "749",
  "last_page": "750",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "61 N.C. App. 749"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 145,
    "char_count": 1827,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.785,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.826042319103239e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8387141489716196
    },
    "sha256": "2290de994ad0cb20f22432b92e1e2557693e7d28c331d85e9f462fd3df125938",
    "simhash": "1:1d37d83d1ae55ac9",
    "word_count": 275
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:13:54.976609+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Wells and Braswell concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "IN THE MATTER OF TONY VENSEN RILEY, Juvenile"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "VAUGHN, Chief Judge.\nThis juvenile proceeding was heard on a petition alleging that the juvenile was delinquent in that he was guilty of felonious breaking and entering.\nOver respondent\u2019s objections, the State was allowed to offer evidence of a statement made by respondent during custodial interrogation. The statement was received without any findings as to whether the respondent had waived his rights.\nG.S. 7A-595 sets out mandatory procedures which must be followed when a juvenile is interrogated by a law enforcement officer. G.S. 7A-595(d) provides: \u201cBefore admitting any statement resulting from custodial interrogation into evidence, the judge must find that the juvenile knowingly, willingly, and understanding^ waived his rights.\u201d (Emphasis added.) The statute clearly provides that before any statement flowing from custodial interrogation is admitted the judge must make the required findings. Since this was not done the order is reversed, and the case is remanded for a new hearing.\nReversed and remanded.\nJudges Wells and Braswell concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "VAUGHN, Chief Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Attorney General Edmisten, by Special Deputy Attorney General Isham B. Hudson, Jr., for the State.",
      "Lipton and Mills, by William S. Mills, for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "IN THE MATTER OF TONY VENSEN RILEY, Juvenile\nNo. 8214DC634\n(Filed 19 April 1983)\nInfants \u00a7 17\u2014 juvenile proceeding \u2014 custodial statement \u2014 necessity for findings\nThe trial court in a juvenile delinquency proceeding erred in admitting, a statement made by the juvenile during custodial interrogation without first making findings as required by G.S. 7A-595(d) that the juvenile knowingly, willingly and understandingly waived his rights.\nAPPEAL by respondent from LaBarre, Judge. Juvenile disposition order entered 6 April 1982 in District Court, DURHAM County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 10 January 1983.\nAttorney General Edmisten, by Special Deputy Attorney General Isham B. Hudson, Jr., for the State.\nLipton and Mills, by William S. Mills, for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0749-01",
  "first_page_order": 781,
  "last_page_order": 782
}