In reviewing a claim that the Miranda rights were violated, how have courts reviewed the evidence in the context of Miranda rights claims?

In reviewing appellant's contention that his Miranda rights were violated, we accept the trial court's resolution of disputed facts and inferences, as well as its evaluation of the credibility of witnesses where supported by substantial evidence. (People v. Whitson (1998) 17 Cal.4th 229, 248.) "'Although we independently determine whether, from the undisputed facts and those properly found by the trial court, the challenged statements were illegally obtained [citation], we "'give great weight to the considered conclusions' of a lower court that has previously reviewed the same evidence." [Citations.]'" (Ibid.)