In In re Aven S. (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 69, a 15-year-old minor challenged the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress his confession, claiming his statements were obtained in violation of his Miranda rights. The minor's particular challenge was that in evaluating whether a minor, as opposed to an adult, has waived their Miranda rights the prosecution must establish the voluntariness of the waiver beyond a reasonable doubt. (Id. at p. 75.) The court rightfully rejected the minor's claim, concluding the proper standard was the same as that applied to an adult, proof by a preponderance of the evidence. In reaching this conclusion, the court cited the Fare v. Michael C. (1979) decision and accepted its totality of the circumstances test as the proper method to evaluate the minor's challenge. (Id. at pp. 75-76.) Later in their discussion, the court acknowledged the People v. Burton (1971) per se rule: "Although a juvenile's request to speak with his parent will normally be construed as an invocation of his Fifth Amendment rights citing Burton, police interviewers are not obliged to advise a juvenile suspect of a right to speak with parents or have them present during questioning ." (Id. at p. 76.) This acknowledgement of Burton came without any discussion of the continuing vitality of this rule in light of the Fare decision's totality of the circumstances test, and the court's own acknowledgement of that decision within their own opinion.