People v. Mosby

Summary

The California Supreme Court held that a defendant’s admission of a prior conviction may be voluntary and intelligent under the totality of the circumstances even when the trial court advised the defendant only of the right to a trial and did not expressly advise him of the rights to remain silent and confront adverse witnesses. The court emphasized that the defendant had just participated in a jury trial, had exercised the right to remain silent and confronted witnesses through counsel, and had prior experience with a guilty plea. The judgment affirming the admission was affirmed.

Holdings

1. An admission of a prior conviction may be voluntary and intelligent under the totality of the circumstances even when the defendant was advised of and waived only the right to trial and was not expressly advised of or asked to waive the rights to remain silent and to confront adverse witnesses.
2. The absence of express advisements and waivers of all three Boykin-Tahl rights does not require automatic reversal; the reviewing court must determine whether the record affirmatively shows that the admission was voluntary and intelligent under the totality of the circumstances.
3. The right to a jury determination of whether a defendant suffered a prior conviction is statutory rather than constitutionally guaranteed under the federal or California Constitution.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant's admission of an alleged prior conviction is voluntary and intelligent when the trial court advises him of and obtains a waiver of only the right to trial, but does not expressly advise him of or obtain express waivers of the rights to remain silent and to confront adverse witnesses.
2. Whether the validity of the admission must be determined by reviewing the entire record under the totality of the circumstances rather than by applying an automatic-reversal rule based solely on incomplete advisements.

Disposition

affirmed