Does a judge have any authority to compel a defendant to renew his objection to the disclosure of his Miranda rights?

In the present case, the comments of the Placer County judge suggest he considered the ruling of the earlier judge to be binding. Moreover, it would appear inconsistent to require that defendant renew his objection to such evidence at trial or lose his right to raise the issue on appeal, while concluding, nevertheless, that he is not entitled to any further hearing on the objection. (See People v. Clark, supra, 3 Cal.4th at p. 119, 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 554, 833 P.2d 561.) Because we have held a defendant is not obligated to renew a pretrial motion that is based upon a statutory privilege, it would be anomalous to subject a defendant raising a claim arising under the Constitution to a different rule. Accordingly, we conclude defendant preserved this issue for appeal.

[9 Cal.4th 128]

2. Whether defendant invoked his Miranda rights