How have the courts interpreted the Miranda rights in a murder case?

This case is thus far easier than People v. Clark, supra, 5 Cal.4th 950. In that case, after invoking his Miranda rights the accused had asked the police about the likely prison term for murder, the charge for which he had been booked; a policeman responded that he had never seen anyone serve more than seven and one-half years. The defendant then said, "'I want this on the record. I'm guilty. I killed her. What do you want to know?'" (5 Cal.4th at p. 982.) In reviewing the defendant's contention that his confession was coerced in violation of Miranda, the court found that substantial evidence supported the trial court's determination that "there was no reason for [the policeman] to have known" that his response concerning possible penalties for murder would produce an incriminating response. (People v. Clark, supra, 5 Cal.4th at p. 985.) There, as here, the police had not raised the subject of the crime for which the defendant was arrested; they had not suggested that a confession would result in favorable treatment; there was no evidence of "'compelling influences, psychological ploys, or direct questioning'" aimed at obtaining an incriminating response. (Id. at pp. 985-986.)