J -S07007-20 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. MICHAEL MOORE, Appellant No. 3076 EDA 2018 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered June 29, 2017 in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0008499-2011 BEFORE: NICHOLS, J., KING, J. and STRASSBURGER, J.* CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY STRASSBURGER, J.: Filed: May 8, 2020 I reluctantly join the memorandum fashioned by the learned Majority.

I join because the Majority has expertly crafted a memorandum that comports with Pennsylvania law as it exists.

I do so reluctantly because, as set forth eloquently in the dissenting opinions of Chief Justice Nix and Justice (later Chief Justice) Zappala in Commonwealth v. Williams, 475 A.2d 1283 (Pa. 1984), Pennsylvania law took a wrong turn when it departed from the per se rule requiring the presence of an interested adult during a police interview of a juvenile in order for the juvenile's confession to be admissible.

Judge Nichols joins this concurring memorandum.

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.