As to the voluntariness of the Miranda waiver by a person whose native language is not English, the court noted that the factors considered include whether a written waiver was signed, whether the waiver was in the individual’s native language, whether the person appeared to understand the rights, whether a translator was used, whether the rights were painstakingly given, and whether the person had previous contacts with the justice system. Here the trial court believed two officers’ testimony that each had advised the defendant of his rights and he said in English that he understood, and he seemed to understand. Important to the trial court’s ruling was the defendant’s affidavit submitted in English, and that appellant possessed many English-language materials in his home. In light of these findings, the district court’s ruling was not erroneous.