ON APPELLANT 'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE SECOND COURT OF APPEALS TARRANT COUNTY
Appellant challenged the court of appeal’s holding that the trial court properly admitted appellant’s un-Mirandized  custodial statements made in response to “questioning attendant to an administrative ‘booking’ procedure.” The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, after considering the diverse interpretations of the booking-question exception, concluded that, in deciding the admissibility of a statement under the exception, a trial court must determine whether the question reasonably related to a legitimate administrative concern, applying an objective standard. An appellate court reviews this determination de novo, as its resolution generally will not turn on an evaluation of credibility and demeanor. However, if a determination requires resolution of disputed facts, an appellate court must defer to the trial court’s findings as to those facts if supported by the record and review de novo whether the question was, objectively, reasonably related to an administrative interest. In the instant case, the record undisputedly showed that, as appellant was being booked into the jail, an officer asked appellant if the non-contraband item discovered in the patrol car belonged to him. Upon confirming that it did, the officer gave the item to facility personnel, who placed it with appellant’s personal property for safekeeping. Based on its de novo review of the record, the court found that the totality of the circumstances objectively showed that the officer’s questions were reasonably related to a legitimate administrativeconcern. The judgment of the court of appeals was thereby affirmed.