In a trial for first degree murder and stalking, the trial court erred when it admitted appellants confession, which was given after inadequate Miranda warnings. The warnings failed to advise appellant of his right to have counsel present before and during questioning. However, appellant testified at trial, and the contents of his testimony were virtually the same as those of his confession, so the error was entirely harmless. Even if appellants decision to testify was in response to the trial courts erroneous ruling, Miranda would not permit reversal. The derivative evidence rules which apply in the case of Fourth Amendment violations do not apply in the Miranda context. As long as the testimony at trial was voluntary, it was admissible.