 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
North Carolina v. Crawford10/21/1986
hearing to determine the admissibility of a defendant's confession, the presiding judge should make findings of fact to show the basis of his ruling. State v. Riddick, 291 N.C. 399, 230 S.E.2d 506 (1976). If there is no conflict in the evidence on voir dire or only immaterial conflicts, it is not error to admit a confession without making specific findings of fact. . . .
State v. Lang, 309 N.C. at 520, 308 S.E.2d at 321. In the present case, there was no conflicting evidence on voir dire as to the defendant's initiation of the conversation some time after he was advised of his right to remain silent. Furthermore, the other evidence from which we have determined that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his rights was also uncontroverted. Therefore, specific findings of fact were not necessary.
No error.
Disposition
No error.
|