What is the test for determining whether a defendant's statements were elicited in violation of the Miranda Act?

In reviewing whether defendant's statements were elicited in violation of Miranda, we apply federal standards. (People v. Bradford (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1005, 1033.) Additionally, "we accept the trial court's resolution of disputed facts and inferences, and its evaluation of credibility, if supported by substantial evidence. [Citation.] Although we independently determine whether, from the undisputed facts and

Page 10

those properly found by the trial court, the challenged statements were illegally obtained (ibid.), we '"give great weight to the considered conclusions" of a lower court that has previously reviewed the same evidence.' [Citations.]" (People v. Wash (1993) 6 Cal.4th 215, 235-236.) Once the facts have been determined, we review the decision to admit the statements under the de novo standard of review, where we independently determine whether the statements were lawfully admitted into evidence. (People v. Weaver (2001) 26 Cal.4th 876, 918.)