Because People v. Burton (1971) 6 Cal.3d 375, 383-384, held that a juvenile’s request to speak to a parent must be construed as an invocation of his or her Fifth Amendment privileges unless there is “evidence demanding a contrary conclusion,” the appellate court’s consideration of the application of the Burton rule required consideration of the circumstances surrounding this minor’s request. Here, in asking to speak to his mother, the minor was not invoking his privileges pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, to request an attorney or to remain silent. Appellant was a 17-year-old young man with substantial prior experience with police and police procedures. When he was read his Miranda rights, he indicated he had heard them before and understood them. When appellant was informed that a detective had been unable to reach his mother, but had left a message for her, appellant did not indicate he wished to stop speaking with the detectives, but instead readily continued to answer their questions. The People’s claim that the trial court erred in failing to impose a Penal Code section 1202.4 restitution fine and a suspended Penal Code section 1202.45 parole revocation fine was waived by the failure to make it at the time of sentencing. (People v. Tillman (2000) 22 Cal.4th 300.)