Can evidence concerning statements made to officers and to the district attorney by appellant be considered admissible at a hearing?

By the specific language of the statute and under its interpretation and application in the cases cited, the evidence concerning the statements made to officers and to the district attorney by appellant were admissible at this hearing even though, as is claimed, they would have been inadmissible under the strict rules of Miranda v. State of Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694. However, in determining the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the challenged finding of guilt of involuntary manslaughter, the court was bound to ignore the evidence as to such statements if they would have been, under the facts here, inadmissible under Miranda. We hold they were inadmissible.