or motion has been made in the trial division.” N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1446(d)(1) (2005). The State also argues that, because defendant’s counsel encouraged the trial court to submit the offense of sexual battery to the jury as a lesser included offense of first degree rape, it would be unfair to allow defendant to now take advantage of the error which he encouraged the trial court to make. Our Supreme Court has adopted the doctrine of invited error, holding that an appellant may not assign error “to the granting of [his] own requests” at trial. State v. Wilkinson, 344 N.C. 198, 213, 474 S.E.2d 375, 383 (1996). North Carolina courts have “consistently denied appellate review” to defendants who do so. Id.; see also State v. Patterson, 332 N.C. 409, 415, 420 S.E.2d 98, 101 (1992) (<HOLDING>). Further, our Supreme Court has held that “a
holding that an appellant is not permitted to rely on invited error on appeal holding that defendant may not complain of error he invited and further holding that reversal cannot be based on such error holding a party may not invite error and then be heard to complain of that error on appeal holding that a party may not invite error and then be heard to complain of that error on appeal holding that invited error does not entitle the defendant to any relief and of which he will not be heard to complain on appeal