What is the current state of the law on "interviewing" a suspect in custody?

"Defendants who are in custody must be given Miranda warnings before police officers may interrogate them. [Citation.] . . . '[T]he Miranda safeguards come into play whenever a person in custody is subjected to either express questioning or its functional equivalent. That is to say, the term "interrogation" under Miranda refers not only to express questioning, but also to any words or actions on the part of the police (other than those normally attendant to arrest and custody) that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect. The latter portion of this definition focuses primarily upon the perceptions of the suspect, rather than the intent of the police.' [Citation.] [] '"Clearly, not all conversation between an officer and a suspect constitutes interrogation. The police may speak to a suspect in custody as long as the speech would not reasonably be construed as calling for an incriminating response."' [Citations.]" (People v. Huggins (2006) 38 Cal.4th 175, 198.)

Page 11

"'Interrogation thus refers to questioning initiated by the police or its functional equivalent, not voluntary conversation. [Citation.] "'Volunteered statements of any kind are not barred by the Fifth Amendment . . . .'"' [Citations.] Consequently, the police 'may speak to a suspect in custody as long as the speech would not reasonably be construed as calling for an incriminating response.' [Citation.]" (People v. Gamache (2010) 48 Cal.4th 347, 387-388.)