What is the test for establishing that a confession was voluntary and not coerced?

A reasonable person in appellant's position would have felt free to end the interrogation and leave. (Howes v. Fields, supra, 565 U.S. at p. 509.) Because a custodial interrogation did not occur, we reject appellant's claim that her trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to do more to seek suppression of her taped statements. In any event, even when we assume that a custodial interrogation occurred, appellant's statements were voluntary and were not coerced.

"Both the state and federal Constitutions bar the prosecution from introducing a defendant's involuntary confession into evidence at trial. [Citations.]" (People v. Linton (2013) 56 Cal.4th 1146, 1176.) Based on a preponderance of the evidence, the prosecution bears the burden of establishing that a defendant's confession was voluntary. (Ibid.) When the interview is tape recorded, an appellate court reviews independently whether a confession was voluntary. (Id. at p. 1177.) The ultimate question is whether the defendant's will was overborne. (Id. at p. 1176.)