How have courts interpreted the Miranda rights of a defendant's Miranda waiver?

"In reviewing Miranda issues on appeal, we accept the trial court's resolution of disputed facts and inferences as well as its evaluations of credibility if substantially supported, but independently determine from undisputed facts and facts found by the trial court whether the challenged statement was legally obtained." (People v. Smith (2007) 40 Cal.4th 483, 502.)

"'Even when a first statement is taken in the absence of proper advisements and is incriminating, so long as the first statement was voluntary a subsequent voluntary confession ordinarily is not tainted simply because it was procured after a Miranda violation. Absent "any actual coercion or other circumstances calculated to undermine the suspect's ability to exercise his free will," a Miranda violationeven one resulting in the defendant's letting "the cat out of the bag"does not "so taint[] the investigatory process that a subsequent voluntary and informed waiver is ineffective for some indeterminate period."'" (People v. Scott (2011) 52 Cal.4th at p. 477.)